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?

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

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