Doyle v Wallace
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 June 1998 |
| Date | 18 June 1998 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Nourse, Lord Justice Otton and Lord Justice Chadwick
Doyle
and
Wallace
Damages - loss of earnings - chance of a job lost - quantification
Damages for loss of chance of job
Damages were recoverable in a personal injury action for loss of earnings from a job for which the plaintiff, had she not suffered injury, might possibly have become qualified. They should be assessed by the court evaluating the chance and applying a percentage amount as a means of quantification.
The Court of Appeal so held in a reserved judgment when, inter alia, affirming in part an award of damages made by Judge Young, sitting as a High Court judge on March 7, 1997, against the defendant, Courtney Wallace, in respect of injuries in a road accident in 1989 suffered by the plaintiff, Julia Marie Doyle, suing by her mother and next friend, Elsa Doyle.
Mr John Leighton-Williams, QC and Mr Christopher Goddard for the defendant; Mr Christopher Purchas, QC and Mr Colin Nixon for the plaintiff.
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
35 cases
-
Gregg v. Scott, (2005) 330 N.R. 1 (HL)
...[paras. 43, 108]. Smith v. National Health Service Litigation, [2001] Lloyd's Med. Rep. 90, refd to. [para. 45]. Doyle v. Wallace, [1998] P.I.Q.R. Q. 146, refd to. [paras. 67, Kranz v. M'Cutcheon (1920), 18 Ontario WN 395, refd to. [para. 69]. Kenyon v. Bell, [1953] S.C. 125, refd to. [para......
-
Gregg v Scott
...what might hypothetically have happened (either before or after the trial) if the claimant had not been injured: see Doyle v Wallace [1998] PIQR Q146, in which the loss of earnings caused by the injury would have been greater if the claimant had qualified as a drama teacher. 68 This princip......
-
Barber v Somerset County Council
...from his award for the chance that things might not have turned out that way. He relied in this context on the judgment of Otton LJ in Doyle v Wallace [1998] PIQR Q 146, 148–150, where reference is made to a passage in the speech of Lord Reid in Davies v Taylor [1974] AC 207, 213, and to th......
-
Manuel Mathieu v Tony Martin Hinds
...see, for example, Anderson v Davis [1993] PIQR Q87 (loss of a two-thirds chance of becoming a principal lecturer), Doyle v Wallace [1998] PIQR Q146 Q87 (loss of a 50% chance of becoming a teacher), Langford v Hebran [2001] PIQR Q13 (loss of various chances of escalating success as a kickbox......
Get Started for Free