Pigford v Sunderland [2003] EWCA Civ 823 (16 May 2003)

Pigford v Sunderland [2003] EWCA Civ 823 (16 May 2003)

The majority held that the trial judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence of Mrs Pigford and Mrs Harrison and the meteorological reports, that the cause of the accident was the wet surface rather than ice, and that this finding was not perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 823
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Eileen Pigford; Defendant/appellant: City of Sunderland
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Burden of Proof, Factual Causation
Tort Personal Injury Negligence Contributory Negligence Burden of Proof Factual Causation

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eileen Pigford

Claimant/respondent

City of Sunderland

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant slipped due to wet or icy conditions
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's factual findings were perverse or unsupported by evidence
  3. 3 Whether the claimant discharged the burden of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the trial judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence of Mrs Pigford and Mrs Harrison and the meteorological reports, that the cause of the accident was the wet surface rather than ice, and that this finding was not perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; original judgment in favour of claimant stands