header-logo header-logo

TORT

08 February 2007
Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Aerospace Publishing Ltd v Thames Water Utilities [2007] EWCA Civ 3, [2007] All ER (D) 02 (Jan)

The defendant was a water undertaker for the purposes of the Water Industry Act 1991 (WIA 1991). One of its mains water pipes burst. A considerable quantity of the escaped water entered premises occupied by the claimants. In proceedings brought by the claimants, the defendant admitted liability pursuant to s 209, WIA 1991. One issue was whether the claimants could recover the cost of staff time.

HELD The fact and extent of the diversion of staff time must be properly established. If claimants do not adduce evidence which it would have been reasonable to adduce, they are at risk of a finding that this has not been established. The claimants also had to establish that the diversion had caused significant disruption to their businesses.

Even though it might be that strictly the claim should be cast in terms of a loss of revenue attributable to the diversion of staff time, despite this, in the ordinary case, unless the defendant could establish the contrary, it is reasonable for the court to infer from the disruption that, had their time not been thus diverted, the staff would have applied it to activities which would, directly or indirectly, have generated revenue in an amount at least equal to the costs for employing them during that time.

Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll