Eves v Viscount [2001] JRC 106 (16 May 2001)

Eves v Viscount [2001] JRC 106 (16 May 2001)

The Court found on balance that the two pictures existed and were present in the garage at the time of eviction, that the Viscount owed a duty of care and was liable for their loss, but that the Plaintiff failed to prove the high value claimed; the pictures were found to be glazed prints of nominal value, not valuable paintings.

Citation
[2001] JRC 106
Parties
Plaintiff: David Eves; Defendant: The Viscount
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
16 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; damages awarded for nominal value only.
Legal Topics
Eviction, Negligence, Loss of Property, Damages, Duty of Care

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Eves

Plaintiff

The Viscount

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

  1. 1 Whether the Viscount is liable in damages for the loss of two pictures and other items during eviction.
  2. 2 Whether the two pictures existed and were present at the premises at the time of eviction.
  3. 3 What is the proper measure of damages for the lost items.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found on balance that the two pictures existed and were present in the garage at the time of eviction, that the Viscount owed a duty of care and was liable for their loss, but that the Plaintiff failed to prove the high value claimed; the pictures were found to be glazed prints of nominal value, not valuable paintings.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; damages awarded for nominal value only.

Orders

  • The Viscount is liable to pay the Plaintiff the market value of the two prints and other listed items, assessed at nominal value.