Parmer v Big Security Company Ltd & Ors

Parmer v Big Security Company Ltd & Ors

The defendant's employee, Mr Colby, unlawfully pushed the claimant, causing his injury. The defence of self-defence was not established on the balance of probabilities. However, the claimant's own prior violent conduct towards a doorman constituted contributory negligence, justifying a reduction of damages by 30%.

Parties
Claimant: Parmer; Defendant: Big Security Company Limited & Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; damages awarded with reduction for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Assault and Battery, Self Defence, Contributory Negligence, Damages

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parmer

Claimant

Big Security Company Limited & Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully assaulted and battered by the defendant's employee
  2. 2 Whether the defence of self-defence was available to the defendant
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was contributorily negligent and to what extent

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's employee, Mr Colby, unlawfully pushed the claimant, causing his injury. The defence of self-defence was not established on the balance of probabilities. However, the claimant's own prior violent conduct towards a doorman constituted contributory negligence, justifying a reduction of damages by 30%.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; damages awarded with reduction for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant for £24,500, being 70% of agreed damages after a 30% reduction for contributory negligence.