Grainger v Cooper

Grainger v Cooper

There is no reasonable necessity for the claimant to purchase alternative accommodation before trial, but a further interim payment of £133,000 is justified under Eeles stage one, as it does not create an unlevel playing field and is a reasonable proportion of the likely final judgment.

Parties
Claimant: Miss Kirsty Grainger; Defendant: Mr Mohammed James Cooper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Interim Application for Further Payment Pending Trial
Outcome
Application allowed in part
Legal Topics
Interim Payments, Damages Assessment, Accommodation Claims, Spinal Cord Injury
Tort Law Personal Injury Interim Payments Damages Assessment Accommodation Claims Spinal Cord Injury

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

Parties

Miss Kirsty Grainger

Claimant

Mr Mohammed James Cooper

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Interim Application for Further Payment Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a further interim payment to fund property purchase and adaptation before trial
  2. 2 Whether the application meets the criteria under CPR Part 25.7 and the Eeles guidance

Ratio Decidendi

There is no reasonable necessity for the claimant to purchase alternative accommodation before trial, but a further interim payment of £133,000 is justified under Eeles stage one, as it does not create an unlevel playing field and is a reasonable proportion of the likely final judgment.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part

Orders

  • A further interim payment of £133,000 to the claimant