Loss of Chance in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Vasiliou v Hajgeorgiou
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 Dic 2010

    In the classic loss of a chance case the most that the claimant can ever say is that what he (or she) has lost is the opportunity to achieve success (e.g.) in a competition ( Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786) or in litigation ( Kitchen v Royal Air Forces Association [1958] 1 WLR 563).

    Where the quantification of loss depends upon an assessment of events which did not happen the judge is left to assess the chances of the alternative scenario he is presented with. It is simply the judge making a realistic and reasoned assessment of a variety of circumstances in order to determine what the level of loss has been. This process was described by Toulson LJ in Parabola Investments Ltd v Browallia Cal Ltd & Others [2010] EWCA Civ 486 in these terms:

  • Salford City Council v Torkington and Another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 09 Dic 2004

    I do not say that, in assessing the likelihood of future loss on a 'loss of chance' basis in a case of this kind, it may not be (indeed it often will be) a proper approach to start with a broad multiplier/multiplicand calculation addressed to the course of events which the judge considers likely on the balance of probabilities.

  • Gregg v Scott
    • House of Lords
    • 27 Ene 2005

    So, for example, the law distinguishes between cases in which the outcome depends upon what the claimant himself ( McWilliams v Sir William Arrol & Co [1962] 1 WLR 295) or someone for whom the defendant is responsible ( Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232) would have done, and cases in which it depends upon what some third party would have done. This apparently arbitrary distinction obviously rests on grounds of policy.

  • Wellesley Partners Llp v Withers Llp
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 11 Nov 2015

    Thus (see Stuart-Smith LJ at page 1610 D-H) where the breach of a duty consists of an omission, for example to provide safety equipment, and the question is what the claimant himself would have done had the breach of duty not occurred — a question of causation — the claimant has to prove the matter on the balance of probabilities.

    Stuart-Smith LJ went on to explain that in many cases the causation of the claimant's loss may depend on the hypothetical action of a third party, either in addition to the claimant himself or independently of him. Once the claimant has shown on the balance of probabilities that he has lost the relevant chance, the valuation of the chance is a question for the quantification or assessment of damages.

  • Perry v Raleys Solicitors
    • Supreme Court
    • 13 Feb 2019

    This sensible, fair and practicable dividing line was laid down by the Court of Appeal in Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons (a firm) [1995] 1 WLR 1602, a decision which received surprisingly little attention in either of the courts below (although, in fairness, the trial judge cited another authority to similar effect: namely Brown v KMR Services [1995] 4 All ER 598).

See all results
Legislation
  • Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1963
    ......be appointed by the Lord Chancellor or, in the case of. a tribunal established for Scotland, by the Lord ...players puts down as stakes, or pays by way of losses,. or exchanges for tokens used in playing the game, is. disposed of ......
  • Divorce Reform Act 1969
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1969
    ...... (3) For the purposes of this section hardship shall include the. loss of the chance of acquiring any benefit which the respondent. might acquire ......
  • Value Added Tax Act 1983
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1983
    ......13 Gaming machines. . (1) Where a person plays a game of chance by means. of a gaming machine, then for the purposes of the tax (but. ...Note . : Item 4 does not include supplies by loss adjusters, average. adjusters, motor assessors, surveyors and other ......
  • Pensions Act 1995
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1995
    ......employee and to any loss sustained by the employee which is attributable. to the matters complained ...party to the marriage will lose the chance of. acquiring,. . . and, accordingly, in relation to benefits under a ......
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT