header-logo header-logo

13 November 2008
Issue: 7345 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The measure of injury

Part two: damages after physical and psychiatric injury, by Rehana Azib

The issue of assessment of damages arose in Gray v (1) Thames Trains Ltd (2) Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd (Formerly Railtrack Plc) [2008] EWCA Civ 713, [2008] All ER (D) 326 (Jun). Gray, who had been involved in the Ladbroke Grove rail crash, appealed against a decision that he was not entitled to damages for loss of earnings due to the principle of ex turpi causa. Gray had suffered severe post traumatic stress disorder as a result of the crash and which had subsequently caused him to undergo a severe personality change. He later stabbed a stranger to death and was detained in a hospital under s 37 of the Mental Health Act 1983, after pleading guilty to manslaughter.

Gray claimed damages on the basis that he was not able to earn as much as he would have done but for the accident. While the defendant admitted liability for loss of earnings up to the date of manslaughter, liability for losses incurred thereafter was

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll