Adams v Autolec Diesel Services (Wales) Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 801 (18 May 2001)

Adams v Autolec Diesel Services (Wales) Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 801 (18 May 2001)

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the trial judge had properly addressed the issues of credibility, causation, and mitigation in a detailed judgment. The judge's findings were supported by the evidence, particularly the testimony of the claimant's business partner, and there was no real prospect of success on appeal.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 801
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Raymond Adams; Defendant/applicant: Autolec Diesel Services (Wales) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Credibility of Witnesses, Mitigation of Loss, Causation
Personal Injury Civil Procedure Quantum of Damages Credibility of Witnesses Mitigation of Loss 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Adams

Claimant/respondent

Autolec Diesel Services (Wales) Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the claimant's credibility and quantum of damages
  2. 2 Whether the claimant failed to mitigate his loss by refusing part-time work
  3. 3 Whether osteo-arthritis broke the chain of causation for loss of earnings

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the trial judge had properly addressed the issues of credibility, causation, and mitigation in a detailed judgment. The judge's findings were supported by the evidence, particularly the testimony of the claimant's business partner, and there was no real prospect of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is refused