Cornes v Southwood

Cornes v Southwood

The court determined the appropriate quantum for future care and case management by balancing the expert evidence, the claimant's actual needs, and past experience. The court set support at 33 hours per week until end of 2009, then 18 hours per week, with 4 weeks per year at enhanced rates for holidays/sickness, and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Cornes (by his litigation friend Julie Baird); Defendant: David Southwood
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Assessment / Judgment on Quantum (assessment of Damages) After Admission of Liability
Outcome
Damages assessed for future care and case management on the basis determined by the court; claim for support worker holiday expenses dismissed; issue of periodical payments deferred.
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Future Care Costs, Periodical Payments, Multiplier for Future Loss, Support Worker Expenses
Tort Personal Injury Assessment of Damages Future Care Costs Periodical Payments Multiplier for Future Loss Support Worker Expenses

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

Parties

Robert Cornes (by his litigation friend Julie Baird)

Claimant

David Southwood

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages Assessment / Judgment on Quantum (assessment of Damages) After Admission of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate quantum for future care and case management costs
  2. 2 Whether damages for future care should be paid as a lump sum or by periodical payments
  3. 3 Appropriate level and structure of support for the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined the appropriate quantum for future care and case management by balancing the expert evidence, the claimant's actual needs, and past experience. The court set support at 33 hours per week until end of 2009, then 18 hours per week, with 4 weeks per year at enhanced rates for holidays/sickness, and rejected additional crisis contingencies. Agency-provided support was preferred. The claim for support worker holiday expenses failed for lack of evidence. The agreed multiplier was not reduced.

Court Disposition

Damages assessed for future care and case management on the basis determined by the court; claim for support worker holiday expenses dismissed; issue of periodical payments deferred.

Orders

  • Damages for future care and case management to be calculated as per the court's findings (33 hours/week to end 2009, then 18 hours/week, 4 weeks/year at enhanced rates, agency provision, specified support worker expenses).
  • Claim for support worker holiday expenses dismissed for want of proof.