Dryden and others v Johnson Matthey Plc

Dryden and others v Johnson Matthey Plc

Platinum salt sensitisation constitutes actionable personal injury because it impairs the claimants' bodily capacity for work, is more than negligible, and is not merely a benign or neutral change. The physiological change makes the claimants appreciably worse off, justifying recovery in negligence/statutory duty.

Parties
Appellants: Dryden and others; Respondent: Johnson Matthey Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Personal Injury Definition, Economic Loss, Implied Contractual Terms
Tort Law Employment Law Personal Injury Negligence Breach of Statutory Duty Personal Injury Definition Economic Loss Implied Contractual Terms

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dryden and others

Appellants

Johnson Matthey Plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether platinum salt sensitisation constitutes actionable personal injury
  2. 2 Whether claimants can recover damages for economic loss absent actionable personal injury

Ratio Decidendi

Platinum salt sensitisation constitutes actionable personal injury because it impairs the claimants' bodily capacity for work, is more than negligible, and is not merely a benign or neutral change. The physiological change makes the claimants appreciably worse off, justifying recovery in negligence/statutory duty.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The claimants have a cause of action in negligence/statutory duty against the company.
  • No need to consider alternative claim for pure economic loss.