Jolghazi & Anor v Ali & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 1101 (12 July 2005)

Jolghazi & Anor v Ali & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 1101 (12 July 2005)

The judge was entitled to prefer the defendant's expert evidence and reject Mr Jolghazi's claim for greater damages; there was no realistic prospect of success on appeal for Mr Jolghazi. In Mrs Jolghazi's case, the judge may have failed to consider relevant later medical evidence, giving a real prospect of success on appeal regarding the quantum of damages.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1101
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Mahmoud Jolghazi; Applicant/claimant: Zahra Jolghazi (also referred to as Zahra Mojabi); Respondent/defendant: Ali; Respondent/defendant: Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury Quantum Only) / Application for Permission to Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Mr Jolghazi: Application for permission to appeal refused. Mrs Jolghazi: Application for permission to appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Permission to Appeal, Expert Evidence, Extension of Time
Personal Injury Civil Procedure Quantum of Damages Permission to Appeal Expert Evidence Extension of Time

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahmoud Jolghazi

Applicant/claimant

Zahra Jolghazi (also referred to as Zahra Mojabi)

Applicant/claimant

Ali

Respondent/defendant

Anr

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury Quantum Only) / Application for Permission to Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing quantum of damages for Mr Jolghazi and Mrs Jolghazi
  2. 2 Whether new expert evidence should be admitted on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the judge misinterpreted or failed to consider relevant medical evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to prefer the defendant's expert evidence and reject Mr Jolghazi's claim for greater damages; there was no realistic prospect of success on appeal for Mr Jolghazi. In Mrs Jolghazi's case, the judge may have failed to consider relevant later medical evidence, giving a real prospect of success on appeal regarding the quantum of damages.

Court Disposition

Mr Jolghazi: Application for permission to appeal refused. Mrs Jolghazi: Application for permission to appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused for Mr Jolghazi.
  • Permission to appeal granted for Mrs Jolghazi.