Davison v Leitch

Davison v Leitch

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that but for the defendant's admitted negligence, the claimant would have continued a highly successful banking career with significant earnings, but due to her injuries, her career was derailed, justifying substantial damages for past and future loss of earnings,...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Sarah Davison; Defendant: Craig Leitch
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Medical Negligence / Judgment After Trial on Quantum
Outcome
Claim allowed; damages awarded for pain, suffering, loss of amenity, past and future loss of earnings, loss of congenial employment, and costs, subject to deductions for necessary childcare expenses.
Legal Topics
Damages Assessment, Loss of Earnings, Loss of Congenial Employment, Costs, Childcare Deductions
Tort Law Medical Negligence Personal Injury Damages Assessment Loss of Earnings Loss of Congenial Employment Costs Childcare Deductions

Source-derived case record

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 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Davison

Claimant

Craig Leitch

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Medical Negligence / Judgment After Trial on Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Assessment of quantum for personal injury following admitted medical negligence
  2. 2 Appropriate calculation of past and future loss of earnings
  3. 3 Deduction for necessary childcare costs from lost earnings

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that but for the defendant's admitted negligence, the claimant would have continued a highly successful banking career with significant earnings, but due to her injuries, her career was derailed, justifying substantial damages for past and future loss of earnings, loss of congenial employment, and necessary childcare deductions. The claimant beat her own Part 36 offer, entitling her to enhanced costs consequences.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; damages awarded for pain, suffering, loss of amenity, past and future loss of earnings, loss of congenial employment, and costs, subject to deductions for necessary childcare expenses.

Orders

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