Collett v Smith & Anor [2008] EWHC 1962 (QB) (11 August 2008)

Collett v Smith & Anor [2008] EWHC 1962 (QB) (11 August 2008)

The court found, on the totality of the lay and expert evidence, that the claimant would, but for the defendants' negligence, have had a successful career as a professional footballer at least at Championship level, with a substantial chance of playing in the Premiership. Damages for loss of earnings are to be assessed on this basis, giving appropriate weight to the claimant's personal attributes, achievements, and the opinions of those who knew his abilities, rather than relying solely on statistical averages.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 1962
Parties
Claimant: Benjamin Collett; First Defendant: Gary Smith; Second Defendant: Middlesbrough Football and Athletics Company (1986) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Assessment of Damages (personal Injury) / Judgment After Trial on Quantum
Outcome
Damages awarded to claimant; quantum to be assessed in accordance with findings.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Assessment of Damages, Loss of Earnings, Loss of Chance, Future Earnings, Pain and Suffering
Tort Law Personal Injury Sports Law Negligence Vicarious Liability Assessment of Damages Loss of Earnings Loss of Chance +2 more

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Collett

Claimant

Gary Smith

First Defendant

Middlesbrough Football and Athletics Company (1986) Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Assessment of Damages (personal Injury) / Judgment After Trial on Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, but for the defendants' negligence, the claimant would have had a successful career as a professional footballer and at what level
  2. 2 What level of remuneration the claimant would have received but for the injury
  3. 3 What level of remuneration the claimant is likely to receive in future employment

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the totality of the lay and expert evidence, that the claimant would, but for the defendants' negligence, have had a successful career as a professional footballer at least at Championship level, with a substantial chance of playing in the Premiership. Damages for loss of earnings are to be assessed on this basis, giving appropriate weight to the claimant's personal attributes, achievements, and the opinions of those who knew his abilities, rather than relying solely on statistical averages.

Court Disposition

Damages awarded to claimant; quantum to be assessed in accordance with findings.

Orders

  • Damages for pain, suffering, loss of amenity, and loss of congenial employment in the sum of £35,000 plus interest of £1,515.
  • Damages for gratuitous care in the sum of £2,469 plus interest of £740.