Cooper v Reed & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 224 (15 February 2001)

Cooper v Reed & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 224 (15 February 2001)

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that the claimant suffered PTSD as a result of the defendants' negligence, that the damages awarded were appropriate except for the period of imprisonment, and that fresh evidence should not be admitted as it would not have affected the outcome. The judge's assessment of credibility and causation was entitled to deference. Damages for loss of earnings during imprisonment must be disallowed per binding precedent.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 224
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mark Frederick Cooper; Defendant/appellant: Elizabeth Reed; Defendant/appellant: Atlas Radio Cars
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Damages Assessment, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (ptsd), Loss of Earnings, Credibility of Witnesses, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Damages Assessment Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (ptsd) Loss of Earnings Credibility of Witnesses Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Frederick Cooper

Claimant/respondent

Elizabeth Reed

Defendant/appellant

Atlas Radio Cars

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant suffered PTSD as a result of the defendants' negligence
  2. 2 Whether the damages awarded were appropriate, including for periods of imprisonment
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence regarding the claimant's credibility and employment should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that the claimant suffered PTSD as a result of the defendants' negligence, that the damages awarded were appropriate except for the period of imprisonment, and that fresh evidence should not be admitted as it would not have affected the outcome. The judge's assessment of credibility and causation was entitled to deference. Damages for loss of earnings during imprisonment must be disallowed per binding precedent.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • Deduction from damages for nine months' loss of earnings during imprisonment per Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority.
  • Claimant to have costs of the appeal.