Khanna v Prosperity Life Assurance Ltd & Ors [2000] EWCA Civ 332 (18 December 2000)

Khanna v Prosperity Life Assurance Ltd & Ors [2000] EWCA Civ 332 (18 December 2000)

There was ample evidence to support the trial judge's conclusion that OSA made a material contribution to Dr Khanna's disability and incapacity at the relevant time, and the judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of Dr Simonds. The defects in the judgment regarding detail did not amount to an appealable error.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 332
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Dr Satish Khanna; Defendants/appellants: Four insurance companies
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Insurance, Medical Evidence, Burden of Proof, Expert Evidence, Causation, Standard of Proof
Insurance Law Medical Law Civil Procedure Disability Insurance Medical Evidence Burden of Proof Expert Evidence Causation +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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Satish Khanna

Claimant/respondent

Four insurance companies

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Khanna was suffering from obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) at the time of his retirement in 1994
  2. 2 Whether OSA made a material contribution to his disablement or incapacity
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in law or failed to give adequate reasons for preferring the claimant's expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

There was ample evidence to support the trial judge's conclusion that OSA made a material contribution to Dr Khanna's disability and incapacity at the relevant time, and the judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of Dr Simonds. The defects in the judgment regarding detail did not amount to an appealable error.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Legal aid assessment