Casey v Cartwright [2006] EWCA Civ 1280 (05 October 2006)

Casey v Cartwright [2006] EWCA Civ 1280 (05 October 2006)

Permission to adduce expert evidence on causation in low-velocity impact personal injury claims should only be granted where the defendant raises the issue promptly, identifies a real prospect of success, and proportionality does not dictate otherwise; Judge Holman's revocation of permission to rely on the joint...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 1280
Parties
Appellant: Debbie Casey; Respondent: David Cartwright
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Case Management Decision (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Case Management, Low Velocity Impact Claims, Causation, Proportionality, Whiplash Injuries
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Expert Evidence Case Management Low Velocity Impact Claims Causation Proportionality Whiplash Injuries

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Debbie Casey

Appellant

David Cartwright

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Case Management Decision (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to adduce expert evidence on causation in low-velocity road traffic accident claims
  2. 2 Correct approach to case management of expert evidence in low-value personal injury claims

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to adduce expert evidence on causation in low-velocity impact personal injury claims should only be granted where the defendant raises the issue promptly, identifies a real prospect of success, and proportionality does not dictate otherwise; Judge Holman's revocation of permission to rely on the joint expert was within his discretion and unappealable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order revoking permission to rely on the evidence of Mr Williams stands
  • Defendant may put questions to Dr Middleman and Dr Middleman may give oral evidence at trial if required