0370 270 6000

Geest Plc v Lansiquot (Privy Counsel)

15 October 2002
The issues

Damages – mitigation – refusal to undertake medical treatment.

The facts

This was an Appeal from the High Court of St Lucia

The Claimant suffered a back injury. There was the possibility that she could undergo a surgical operation to improve her pain. She had been told that the operation was the only way that the pain would be improved, but that its success could not be guaranteed. She decided against the operation. The Defendant argued that this was unreasonable of her and that she had failed to mitigate her loss.

The decision

1. A previous decision of the Board in Selvanayagam -v- The University of the West Indies could no longer be relied upon as an accurate statement of the law.

2. The burden was on the Defendant to prove failure by the Claimant to mitigate damage and not on the Claimant to show that her refusal to undertake the operation was reasonable.

3. On the evidence, there was nothing to suggest that the Claimant had been unreasonable.

4. On a general point, where a Defendant alleged that a Claimant had failed to mitigate, notice should be given long enough before the Hearing to enable the Claimant to meet that case. If there were no pleadings, the notice should be given by letter.

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