Faunch v O'Donoghue & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 896 (28 June 2013)

Faunch v O'Donoghue & Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 896 (28 June 2013)

Permission to appeal granted because the trial judge reached a conclusion not canvassed during trial, denying parties and experts the opportunity to address its implications, potentially resulting in unfairness and miscarriage of justice.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 896
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Janet Faunch; First Defendant/applicant: Mr O'Donoghue; Second Defendant: Mr Brice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Road Traffic Accident, Liability Apportionment, Fair Trial, Expert Evidence
Tort Personal Injury Civil Procedure Road Traffic Accident Liability Apportionment Fair Trial Expert Evidence

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Faunch

Claimant/respondent

Mr O'Donoghue

First Defendant/applicant

Mr Brice

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial process was flawed due to the judge reaching a conclusion not canvassed during trial
  2. 2 Whether parties were denied opportunity to address the judge's hypothesis
  3. 3 Whether the evidence of witnesses and experts was properly considered

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal granted because the trial judge reached a conclusion not canvassed during trial, denying parties and experts the opportunity to address its implications, potentially resulting in unfairness and miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is granted to the First Defendant/Applicant