Patterson v National Floor Coverings Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 288 (13 February 2001)

Patterson v National Floor Coverings Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 288 (13 February 2001)

The trial judge erred in his calculation of distances and failed to account for evidence that, had the defendant's employee braked, the accident or its severity could have been avoided. The negligence was causative of the accident and injuries. Apportionment of liability at one-third to the defendant and two-thirds to the claimant is appropriate given comparative blameworthiness and causative potency.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 288
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Nathan Patterson; Respondent/defendant: National Floor Coverings Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Leeds County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Causation, Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Liability
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Causation Contributory Negligence Apportionment of Liability

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathan Patterson

Appellant/claimant

National Floor Coverings Ltd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Leeds County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the negligence of the defendant's employee was causative of the accident and injuries
  2. 2 Proper apportionment of liability between claimant and defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in his calculation of distances and failed to account for evidence that, had the defendant's employee braked, the accident or its severity could have been avoided. The negligence was causative of the accident and injuries. Apportionment of liability at one-third to the defendant and two-thirds to the claimant is appropriate given comparative blameworthiness and causative potency.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the judge's order
  • Substitute a finding of liability on the part of the defendant with the claimant two-thirds to blame