Kerr v William Morrison Supermarket Plc & Anor

Kerr v William Morrison Supermarket Plc & Anor

The Court of Appeal held that there was no unfairness to the appellant as the issues of mechanical defect and res ipsa loquitur were sufficiently raised before and during trial, the evidence supported the trial judge's finding of a defect in the nozzle, and the findings were not against the weight of the evidence....

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Kerr; Respondent: William Morrison Supermarket PLC & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Product Liability, Pleadings, Res Ipsa Loquitur
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Product Liability Pleadings Res Ipsa Loquitur

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerr

Appellant

William Morrison Supermarket PLC & Anr

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in allowing the claimant to depart from the pleaded case at trial
  2. 2 Whether the finding that the LPG nozzle was defective was against the weight of the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the principle of res ipsa loquitur was properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that there was no unfairness to the appellant as the issues of mechanical defect and res ipsa loquitur were sufficiently raised before and during trial, the evidence supported the trial judge's finding of a defect in the nozzle, and the findings were not against the weight of the evidence. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment for the claimant in the sum of £17,000 stands