Williams v Hawkes

Williams v Hawkes

The steer’s unpredictable and panicked behaviour, caused by averse stimuli and continuing up to the time of the accident, was a characteristic not normally found in cattle except in particular circumstances. This characteristic was causative of the accident, satisfying the requirements of section 2(2)(a) and (b) of the Animals Act 1971. The trial judge’s findings were supported by expert evidence and the interpretation of the statute in Mirvahedy v Henley. The appeal was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Martyn Williams; Defendant/appellant: Jeffrey Llewellyn Hawkes (Executor of the Estate of Derfyl Llewellyn Hawkes, Deceased)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; trial judgment for the claimant upheld.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Animals Act 1971, Causation, Negligence
Tort Law Statutory Interpretation Strict Liability Animals Act 1971 Causation Negligence

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martyn Williams

Claimant/respondent

Jeffrey Llewellyn Hawkes (Executor of the Estate of Derfyl Llewellyn Hawkes, Deceased)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the keeper of a steer is strictly liable under section 2(2) of the Animals Act 1971 for damage caused by the animal's behaviour after being startled and escaping onto a highway
  2. 2 Whether causation was established between the steer’s particular characteristics and the accident

Ratio Decidendi

The steer’s unpredictable and panicked behaviour, caused by averse stimuli and continuing up to the time of the accident, was a characteristic not normally found in cattle except in particular circumstances. This characteristic was causative of the accident, satisfying the requirements of section 2(2)(a) and (b) of the Animals Act 1971. The trial judge’s findings were supported by expert evidence and the interpretation of the statute in Mirvahedy v Henley. The appeal was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; trial judgment for the claimant upheld.