Marguerite v Roberts (CS 175/1999) [2001] SCSC 14 (11 June 2001)

Marguerite v Roberts (CS 175/1999) [2001] SCSC 14 (11 June 2001)

The plaintiff is entitled to damages for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities, but the quantum must reflect the actual incapacity and the failure to mitigate damages by refusing arthroscopy. The multiplier-multiplicand method is inappropriate given the uncertainties in future earning capacity; a fair lump sum is awarded instead.

Citation
[2001] SCSC 14
Parties
Plaintiff: Marguerite; Defendant: Roberts
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
11 June 2001
Case Number
CS 175/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Damages, Negligence, Loss of Earnings, Pain and Suffering, Mitigation of Damages
Source Language
English
Tort Personal Injury Damages Negligence Loss of Earnings Pain and Suffering Mitigation 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marguerite

Plaintiff

Roberts

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Assessment of quantum of damages for personal injuries
  2. 2 Whether refusal to undergo arthroscopy amounts to failure to mitigate damages
  3. 3 Appropriate method for calculating loss of future earnings

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is entitled to damages for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities, but the quantum must reflect the actual incapacity and the failure to mitigate damages by refusing arthroscopy. The multiplier-multiplicand method is inappropriate given the uncertainties in future earning capacity; a fair lump sum is awarded instead.

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded R82,750 in damages
  • Interest and costs awarded to plaintiff