Brand v. Transocean North Sea Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSOH_57 (24 March 2011)

Brand v. Transocean North Sea Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSOH_57 (24 March 2011)

The pursuer failed to prove, on the evidence, that he would have become a rig manager within the claimed timeframe or at all, and the uncertainties in career progression and salary levels made the Ogden Tables inappropriate. However, due to his disability, he is at a disadvantage in the labour market, justifying a lump sum award for loss of employability.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSOH_57
Parties
Pursuer: Martin John Alexander Brand; Defender: Transocean North Sea Limited (formerly GlobalSantafe North Sea Limited); Defender: Transocean Drilling (UK) Limited (formerly GlobalSantafe Drilling UK Ltd)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim / Judgment After Proof (trial) on Quantum
Outcome
Award for disadvantage in the labour market; no award for specific future wage or pension loss.
Legal Topics
Future Loss of Earnings, Loss of Pension, Disability Discrimination, Application of Ogden Tables, Assessment of Damages
Personal Injury Employment Law Future Loss of Earnings Loss of Pension Disability Discrimination Application of Ogden Tables Assessment of Damages

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 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin John Alexander Brand

Pursuer

Transocean North Sea Limited (formerly GlobalSantafe North Sea Limited)

Defender

Transocean Drilling (UK) Limited (formerly GlobalSantafe Drilling UK Ltd)

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim / Judgment After Proof (trial) on Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer proved entitlement to future loss of earnings and pension based on likely promotion to rig manager
  2. 2 Whether the Ogden Tables should be applied to assess future losses
  3. 3 Whether a lump sum award for disadvantage on the labour market is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to prove, on the evidence, that he would have become a rig manager within the claimed timeframe or at all, and the uncertainties in career progression and salary levels made the Ogden Tables inappropriate. However, due to his disability, he is at a disadvantage in the labour market, justifying a lump sum award for loss of employability.

Court Disposition

Award for disadvantage in the labour market; no award for specific future wage or pension loss.

Orders

  • Awarded a lump sum of £160,000 for disadvantage in the labour market.
  • Previous interim payments of £40,000 (solatium and services) noted as paid.