McKenzie v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2023] EWHC 1904 (KB) (28 July 2023)

McKenzie v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2023] EWHC 1904 (KB) (28 July 2023)

The judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the solar panels increased the sale price of the claimant's property and to use the Hodgson calculation as a proxy for quantifying that benefit, given the absence of expert evidence. The judge's reasons were sufficient and his approach was not irrational or procedurally unfair. The appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1904 (KB)
Parties
Claimant and Appellant: Nicola McKenzie; Defendant and Respondent: Creation Consumer Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Damages, Consumer Credit Act 1974, Assessment of Loss, Mitigation of Loss
Contract Law Consumer Credit Tort Law Misrepresentation Damages Consumer Credit Act 1974 Assessment of Loss Mitigation of Loss

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicola McKenzie

Claimant and Appellant

Creation Consumer Finance Limited

Defendant and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge gave adequate reasons for requiring the claimant to give credit for future benefits from solar panels after sale of property
  2. 2 Whether the judge was correct in finding that the solar panels increased the sale price of the property
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in law or fact in quantifying the benefit to the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that the solar panels increased the sale price of the claimant's property and to use the Hodgson calculation as a proxy for quantifying that benefit, given the absence of expert evidence. The judge's reasons were sufficient and his approach was not irrational or procedurally unfair. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed; no damages awarded to claimant.