Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc

Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc

Kosmar owed no duty to warn or protect the claimant against the obvious risk of diving into a shallow pool, as the risk was apparent to an adult of full capacity and the claimant made a genuine and informed choice. There was no breach of contract or statutory duty, and causation was not established as better signage would not have prevented the accident.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: James Evans; Defendant/appellant: Kosmar Villa Holidays plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Occupiers' Liability, Holiday Contracts, Duty of Care, Contributory Negligence, Causation
Contract Law Tort Law Personal Injury Occupiers' Liability Holiday Contracts Duty of Care Contributory Negligence 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Evans

Claimant/respondent

Kosmar Villa Holidays plc

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tour operator owed a duty of care to warn or protect the claimant against the risk of diving into a shallow pool under the holiday contract and the Package Travel Regulations 1992.
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of contract or statutory duty by failing to provide adequate warnings or signage.
  3. 3 Whether causation was established between any breach and the injury.

Ratio Decidendi

Kosmar owed no duty to warn or protect the claimant against the obvious risk of diving into a shallow pool, as the risk was apparent to an adult of full capacity and the claimant made a genuine and informed choice. There was no breach of contract or statutory duty, and causation was not established as better signage would not have prevented the accident.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The claimant's claim is dismissed.