West v Wilkinson & Anor

West v Wilkinson & Anor

Although the trial judge failed to give reasons for apportioning liability equally between the defendants, a process of reasoning could justify the conclusion that both defendants were equally blameworthy and causatively potent. The appellate court found no basis to interfere with the apportionment.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: West; Appellants/defendants: Wilkinson & Another
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Apportionment of Liability
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Apportionment of Liability, Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accident
Tort Law Civil Procedure Negligence Apportionment of Liability Contributory Negligence Road Traffic Accident

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

West

Respondent/claimant

Wilkinson & Another

Appellants/defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Apportionment of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in apportioning liability equally between the two defendants without giving reasons
  2. 2 Whether the apportionment was justified based on the findings of negligence and causative potency

Ratio Decidendi

Although the trial judge failed to give reasons for apportioning liability equally between the defendants, a process of reasoning could justify the conclusion that both defendants were equally blameworthy and causatively potent. The appellate court found no basis to interfere with the apportionment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.