0370 270 6000

Newman v Folkes & Another, Court of Appeal

8 May 2002
The issues

Cost of Care – Gratuitous Care Rates

The facts

The Claimant was seriously injured in a road traffic accident. Amongst the heads of damage were cost of care. £100,000.00 was awarded in respect of this item of claim. The care was provided gratuitously by the wife. The Judge made the award without a discount from the commercial rate paid to care assistants. The Defendant appealed inter alia against the award for past and future care.

The decision

1. The Claimant was potentially a violent individual demanding attention both day and night.

2. A carer would receive an increased rate for unsocial hours.

3. The Judge had calculated this award on the cost of care on the basis of flat rates.

4. There was no conventional discount which had to be applied where care was provided gratuitously – see Evans v Pontypridd Roofing Limited.

The Court quoted May LJ “this Court should avoid putting first instance Judges in too restrictive a straight jacket, such as might happen if it was said that the means of assessing a proper recompense for services provided gratuitously by a family carer had to be assessed in a particular way or ways. Circumstances vary enormously and what is appropriate and just in one case may no be so in another%u2026 the assessment is of an amount as a whole. The means of reaching the assessment must depend on what is appropriate to the individual case”.

The Judge had looked at this head of damages. He had made no error of principal and the exercise of discretion did not produce a figure that was played upon.

Appeal dismissed.

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