Davison v Leitch [2013] EWHC 3092 (QB) (18 October 2013)

Davison v Leitch [2013] EWHC 3092 (QB) (18 October 2013)

The court found on the balance of probabilities that but for the injury, the claimant would have resumed a highly successful banking career, achieved promotion, and earned substantial remuneration, with necessary deductions for childcare. The claimant's injury directly caused her loss of earnings and career prospects, and she is entitled to damages accordingly. The claimant beat her Part 36 offer, so enhanced costs consequences apply.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3092
Parties
Claimant: Sarah Davison; Defendant: Craig Leitch
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Clinical Negligence / Quantum Trial Following Admission of Liability
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant on quantum as assessed; claimant entitled to enhanced costs under CPR 36.14.
Legal Topics
Damages Assessment, Loss of Earnings, Loss of Congenial Employment, Childcare Costs, Part 36 Offers, Interest and Costs
Tort Law Medical Negligence Damages Assessment Loss of Earnings Loss of Congenial Employment Childcare Costs Part 36 Offers Interest and Costs

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 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Davison

Claimant

Craig Leitch

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Clinical Negligence / Quantum Trial Following Admission of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Assessment of quantum for serious obstetric injury
  2. 2 Appropriate deduction for childcare costs in lost earnings
  3. 3 Calculation of future loss of earnings and residual earning capacity

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the balance of probabilities that but for the injury, the claimant would have resumed a highly successful banking career, achieved promotion, and earned substantial remuneration, with necessary deductions for childcare. The claimant's injury directly caused her loss of earnings and career prospects, and she is entitled to damages accordingly. The claimant beat her Part 36 offer, so enhanced costs consequences apply.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant on quantum as assessed; claimant entitled to enhanced costs under CPR 36.14.

Orders

  • Damages awarded as per judgment calculations, including agreed and assessed heads of loss.
  • Deduction for childcare costs at £650 per month until March 2013 only.