Bailey and Another v HSS Alarms Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 March 2000 |
| Date | 22 March 2000 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
COURT OF APPEAL
Before Lord Justice Aldous and Mr Justice Turner
Negligence - loss of profit - defendant liable for all foreseeable damage
Where a claim for damages on account of the defendant's negligence included a claim for loss of profit, and the circumstances established were that the damages were not too remote and that the loss of profit arose directly from the physical damage caused, there was no policy reason to exclude a duty of care for all foreseeable damage that directly arose.
The Court of Appeal so held dismissing the appeal of the defendant, HSS Alarms Ltd, against the judgment of Judge Walker in the Wandsworth County Court on May 27, 1999, ordering that the claimants, Mr N. G. Bailey and Mrs S. A. Bailey, trading as Baileys Motor Works, should recover Pounds 18,104.29 damages and interest of Pounds 7,724.50 from the defendant.
The claimants' business at Burnt Mills Industrial Estate, Basildon, Essex was burgled on January 14, 1994 between 12 midnight and 8.00am and a substantial quantity of property was taken.
The defendant had subcontracted the responsibility for monitoring signals from the burglar alarm system from the installers, who had gone out of business, and it had a central station manned at all times which received signals from the alarms when activated.
On receipt of a signal the relevant authority, usually the police, was informed as were the key-holders of the premises. On the date of the burglary the police were informed and attended the premises but could find no evidence of a break-in. The judge found the defendant failed to inform the claimants.
Mr Simon Edwards for the defendant; Mr Toby Gee for the claimants.
LORD JUSTICE ALDOUS said that the judge was right to conclude there was close proximity between the parties.
The defendant was engaged for reward to carry out the monitoring service and assumed, albeit through an indirect subcontracting relationship, the responsibility for carrying out the service. It should have known the claimants relied on it to carry out its service properly.
An analogous case was Kent v Griffiths and Others (No 2)TLRWLR (The Times February 10, 2000; (2000) 2 WLR 1158) where an ambulance service accepted a 999 call and therefore accepted responsibility for sending the ambulance.
Here, the defendant not only accepted the call and accepted the responsibility for monitoring calls, but was also under a contractual...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Craig v Advocate General for Scotland
...2 All ER 911; [2018] Lloyd's Rep FC 217; [2018] ACD 33 Magee v UK [2000] ECHR 216; (2001) 31 EHRR 35; 8 BHRC 646; [2000] Po LR 188; The Times, 20 June 2000; [2000] Crim LR 681 RM v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 58; 2013 SC (UKSC) 139; 2013 SLT 57; 2013 SCLR 98; [2012] 1 WLR 3386; [2013] MH......
-
Ashby v Hunte et Al
...of so many different architectures this is inevitable….” 27 In the recent Court of Appeal decision of Neil v. Rankin and another The Times 20th June, 2000 Olton, L.J. delivering the decision of that court reviewed both Baker v Willoughby and Jobling and concluded that two things follow: “Fi......
-
The rule of law in China.
...note 1, at 128. (7.) LUBMAN, supra note 1, at 315 (quoting Article X of GATT). See also China Enters Last Lap Before WTO Entry, FIN. TIMES, June 20, 2000, at 8 (discussing the final negotiations of legal changes required for China's admission). As of this writing, high-level negotiations we......