Dickens v Bearman [2003] EWCA Civ 1397 (02 October 2003)

Dickens v Bearman [2003] EWCA Civ 1397 (02 October 2003)

There was no evidence to support a finding of contributory negligence against the claimant; the defendant was wholly to blame for failing to keep a proper lookout and reversing too briskly. The judge's apportionment of liability was therefore incorrect and should be set aside.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1397
Parties
Claimant/appellant: John Dickens (by his mother and litigation friend Mrs Dickens); Defendant/respondent: John Bearman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury, Running Down Action) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Apportionment of Liability, Evidence (cctv), Contributory Negligence
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Apportionment of Liability Evidence (cctv) Contributory Negligence

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Dickens (by his mother and litigation friend Mrs Dickens)

Claimant/appellant

John Bearman

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury, Running Down Action) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was contributorily negligent in the circumstances of the accident
  2. 2 Whether the judge was correct to apportion liability equally between claimant and defendant

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence to support a finding of contributory negligence against the claimant; the defendant was wholly to blame for failing to keep a proper lookout and reversing too briskly. The judge's apportionment of liability was therefore incorrect and should be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order substituted: Defendant held 100% liable for the accident and its consequences.
  • Application for permission to appeal by defendant refused.