Hinchcliffe & Anor v Smith & Ors

Hinchcliffe & Anor v Smith & Ors

The judge's assessment of damages was based on available expert evidence, relevant factors, and was not plainly wrong; there is no real prospect of success in appeal.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Marjorie Hinchcliffe; Appellant: Shaun Smith; Appellant: Alexander Smith; Appellant: Keith Smith; Respondent: Mr Hinchcliffe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Assessment of Damages, Breach of Trust, Case Management, Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Tort Conspiracy Assessment of Damages Breach of Trust Case Management Expert Evidence

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

Parties

Marjorie Hinchcliffe

Respondent

Shaun Smith

Appellant

Alexander Smith

Appellant

Keith Smith

Appellant

Mr Hinchcliffe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's assessment of damages for conspiracy was plainly wrong or unsupported by evidence
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in accepting the claimants' expert evidence without sufficient critical analysis
  3. 3 Whether there was double counting in the award for capital loss and loss of future earnings

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's assessment of damages was based on available expert evidence, relevant factors, and was not plainly wrong; there is no real prospect of success in appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs summarily assessed at £5,190 to be paid by the defendants