header-logo header-logo

07 June 2007 / Natalie Johnston
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

A bridge too far?

Should employers expect to recoup the management costs of resolving a tort? Natalie Johnston investigates

Time is money, or so the saying goes. So what happens when a business’s employees have to divert a substantial amount of their time to the investigation or mitigation of a tort or breach of contract? Can the business recover the costs of the employees’ time?

R + V Versicherung AG v Risk Insurance and Reinsurance Solutions SA [2006] EWHC 42 (Comm), [2006] All ER (D) 209 (Jan) confirmed that a business can recover the cost of wasted staff time spent on the investigation or mitigation of a tort as a separate head of loss. The ability to recover will depend on whether or not the business can show with certainty that the expenditure relates to the investigation or mitigation. There is no need to show that there has been additional expenditure or loss of profits.

Bridge Communications

Bridge UK Com Ltd (t/a Bridge Communications) v Abbey Pynford plc [2007] EWHC 728 (TCC), [2007] All ER (D) 156

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll