Tolley v Carr & Ors [2010] EWHC 2191 (QB) (11 May 2010)

Tolley v Carr & Ors [2010] EWHC 2191 (QB) (11 May 2010)

Mr Tolley was not guilty of contributory negligence because he acted reasonably and bravely in the circumstances to avert a substantial risk to others, having checked for oncoming traffic and being motivated solely by the desire to reduce danger; the defendants failed to prove any wanton or unreasonable disregard for his own safety.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2191 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: David Tolley; First Defendant: Claire Carr; Second Defendant: Helen Johnson; Third Defendant: Damian O'Callaghan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Negligence Claim / Trial on Liability (contributory Negligence Only)
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant; no contributory negligence found.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Rescuer Doctrine, Duty of Care
Tort Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Rescuer Doctrine Duty of Care

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Tolley

Claimant

Claire Carr

First Defendant

Helen Johnson

Second Defendant

Damian O'Callaghan

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Negligence Claim / Trial on Liability (contributory Negligence Only)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant, Mr Tolley, was guilty of contributory negligence in attempting to move a vehicle from a motorway after rescuing the driver.

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Tolley was not guilty of contributory negligence because he acted reasonably and bravely in the circumstances to avert a substantial risk to others, having checked for oncoming traffic and being motivated solely by the desire to reduce danger; the defendants failed to prove any wanton or unreasonable disregard for his own safety.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant; no contributory negligence found.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Claimant.
  • Damages to be assessed without reduction for contributory negligence.