Johnson v Choice Support [2025] EWHC 1020 (SCCO) (28 April 2025)

Johnson v Choice Support [2025] EWHC 1020 (SCCO) (28 April 2025)

The claimant's solicitors reasonably valued the claim above the EL/PL Protocol limit based on the evidence and client instructions at the time. The incident did not amount to 'harm, abuse or neglect' by or of a vulnerable adult within the meaning of paragraph 4.3(8) of the Protocol, so the protocol would otherwise apply but for the value assessment.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1020 (SCCO)
Parties
Claimant: Julie Johnson; Defendant: Choice Support
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Detailed Assessment of Costs / Judgment on Preliminary Points of Dispute Regarding Protocol Applicability
Outcome
Found for the Claimant on both points of principle.
Legal Topics
Pre Action Protocols, Employers' Liability, Public Liability, Vulnerable Adults Exception, Assessment of Damages, Reasonable Valuation of Claims
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Pre Action Protocols Employers' Liability Public Liability Vulnerable Adults Exception Assessment of Damages +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julie Johnson

Claimant

Choice Support

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Detailed Assessment of Costs / Judgment on Preliminary Points of Dispute Regarding Protocol Applicability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the EL/PL Protocol applies to the claim given the value and the involvement of a vulnerable adult
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's solicitors reasonably valued the claim above the protocol limit
  3. 3 Whether the incident constituted 'harm, abuse or neglect' under paragraph 4.3(8) of the EL/PL Protocol

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's solicitors reasonably valued the claim above the EL/PL Protocol limit based on the evidence and client instructions at the time. The incident did not amount to 'harm, abuse or neglect' by or of a vulnerable adult within the meaning of paragraph 4.3(8) of the Protocol, so the protocol would otherwise apply but for the value assessment.

Court Disposition

Found for the Claimant on both points of principle.

Orders

  • The claimant's solicitors' valuation was reasonable and above the protocol limit.
  • The exception for harm, abuse or neglect of or by a vulnerable adult does not apply on these facts.