Moeliker v A Reyolle – 1977

331 words (1 pages) Case Summary in Cases

07/03/18 Cases Reference this

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Parallelewelten.net.

If you would like to view samples of the work produced by our academic writers please click here.

Moeliker v A Reyolle & Co Ltd [1977] 1 All ER 9

QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES

Facts

The claimant had been apprenticed to the defendant company when he was a teenager and had been employed by them ever since.  In his mid forties, he suffered a serious injury to his hand whilst at work, as a result of which his thumb and index finger were amputated. He required several months off work to recover but lost no wages during this period. However, he suffered long term pain and loss of the use of his hand, particularly in that he was unable to enjoy his favourite pastime of fishing. He brought a claim against the defendant for personal injury, and at first instance was awarded damages for both pain, suffering and loss of amenity and for loss of earning capacity.

Issue

The claimant contended that both sums were too low; the basis on which damages for loss of earnings and for pain, suffering, and loss of amenity should be calculated was therefore in issue.

Held

The Court dismissed the appeal against the award for loss of earnings, setting out the factors which should be taken into account when quantifying this head of damages. These included the existence of a real or substantial risk that a plaintiff might lose his employment within his working life and/ or might be disadvantaged in securing similar employment.  Where such a risk could be shown the assessment of damages should take into account: the extent of the risk; the time when the loss of employment might occur; factors affecting the plaintiff's chances of securing alternative employment.

The award for pain, suffering, and loss of amenity was increased, taking into account the number of years for which the claimant would likely have to live with the injury.

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please.

https://agroxy.com

детские бальные платья

Current Offers