0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Catlaugh v Caradon Everest Ltd

21 September 2000
The issues


The facts

Pursuer sought damages for depressive illness which he inferred was caused by the stress he was subjected to whilst working for the Defender. “the pursuers factual averments are prolix in the extreme” – in essence the complaint was of a disorganised and overloaded system of work exacerbated by an overbearing and bullying management style. Effectively the pursuer was claiming that he was not able to refuse work given to him and that he was obliged to do everything and anything asked off him regardless of practicality and the hours involved. The pursuer offered no explanation as to how this extraordinary state of affairs came about. There was no suggestion that the pursuer was in some way disadvantaged or vulnerable to exploitation. The Court noted that the Claimant appeared to be self employed and that his remuneration depended on the number of service calls he made as a double glazing engineer.

The decision

A case of this sort would normally expect to be set in context by reference to the contractual terms which underlay the relationship between the parties. This was not the case here. The allegation that the pursuer could have been dismissed was particularly irrelevant in these circumstances.

Obiter the pursuer had failed to aver any recognised psychiatric illness or that there were facts or circumstances from which could be inferred that such an illness was reasonably foreseeable and he had failed to aver what precautions should have been taken to avoid such injury.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up