0370 270 6000

Hatton v Cooper, Court of Appeal

8 May 2001
The issues

Centre Of Road Collisions – Inferences To Be Drawn – Equal Responsibility

The facts

On 19th September 1995 during the day and in god visibility the Claimant’s car collided with the Defendant’s car when both were travelling in opposite directions. Neither party had any recollection of the impact and there were no eyewitnesses. The Judge found the Defendant wholly responsible for the collision. The Defendant accepted primary liability but alleged 50% contributory negligence. The Defendant alleged that both parties approached each other on a collision course near the centre of the road without deviating from it and responsibility should be shared equally.

The decision

On the evidence it was likely that one of the vehicles had suddenly changed direction when it was too late for the other to take evasive action. The Judge had concluded that the Defendant was wholly responsible on the basis of the evidence of the Claimant’s employer that he was a careful driver. The Judge had been wrong to attach any significant weight to that evidence. Without that evidence there was no basis for finding the Defendants solely responsible for the collision. The only reasonable and proper inference that could be drawn from the available evidence was that each party was partly responsible. Since the evidence did not enable the Court to apportion the blame equally between them it followed on the authority of Baker v Market Harbour Industrial Co-operative Society Limited (1953) that both drivers were equally responsible.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


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.


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