Chang v Delgreco [2004] EWCA Civ 407 (11 February 2004)

Chang v Delgreco [2004] EWCA Civ 407 (11 February 2004)

The trial judge's findings regarding the claimant's ability to reorganise his working pattern and the absence of loss of income until mid-2001 were supported by the evidence; the judge's broad brush approach was justified given the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence, and the calculation of loss post-software implementation was appropriate.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 407
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Benjamin Chang; Defendant/respondent: Grazia Delgreco
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Quantum of Damages
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Loss of Earnings, Mitigation of Loss
Tort Personal Injury Quantum of Damages Loss of Earnings Mitigation of Loss

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Chang

Claimant/appellant

Grazia Delgreco

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Quantum of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in assessing loss of earnings resulting from personal injury
  2. 2 Whether the claimant failed to mitigate loss by instituting pain management earlier
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly evaluated evidence regarding claimant's working pattern post-accident

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's findings regarding the claimant's ability to reorganise his working pattern and the absence of loss of income until mid-2001 were supported by the evidence; the judge's broad brush approach was justified given the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence, and the calculation of loss post-software implementation was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs assessed in the sum of £4,500