The importance of a Care expert sufficiently justifying any aspect of care and the effect it has on quantum.
In the case of Scarcliffe -v- Brampton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter explains the importance of Care expert reports following a Personal Injury case brought by the Claimant.
The Claimant brought a claim of personal Injury following an accident during the course of his employment.
The Claim arose when the Claimant, whilst under the employment of the Defendant, was working with a chainsaw, when a fellow employee slipped leading to a large tree trunk landing on the Claimant’s back.
The accident caused the Claimant to suffer severe pain together with two transverse spinal fractures and also renal damage, although this element of the injury was not long lasting.
It was also the Claimant’s case that the accident caused the development of post traumatic pain in the lumber region meaning it was to be life changing.
The quantum of the Claimant’s claim was initially valued in excess of £6m. The Defendant’s pre-trial valuation was £136,824.79 plus general damages.
At the time of the accident the Claimant had 3 children, 1 of which was severely disabled and therefore was dependant on assistance and 1 of which was later was diagnosed as disabled and also became dependant on assistance.
A large part of the special damages claim was based upon the fact that these children were dependant on a very high level of care which he was no longer unable to provide to the level he could prior to his accident. The Claimant and his wife went on to have two more children, unfortunately one of which had investigations commence due to concerns about his behaviour and development.
During the course of the trial the Claimant was challenged on the true reflection of his care claim now compared to the level of care he was providing before his accident, based upon him working full time and pursuing his outside hobbies.
Ms Lewis was instructed as the Care expert and provided a Care report in support of the Claimant’s claim, which was highly criticized by the Court.
Mr Justice Cotter during the trial found that there were significant parts of Ms Lewis’ evidence that were unsatisfactory and/or ill thought out.
Mr Justice Cotter also found that there was lack of documentation in respect of one of the children’s future care aspects together with conflicting information being provided only one year apart.
Mr Justice Cotter also raised that Ms Lewis has failed to address statutory assessment in any detail, even after Ms Lewis provided an addendum report.
The Conclusion of the claim was that the Claimant was awarded much less than originally sought which resulted in quantum being awarded in the sum of £275,063.03 of which only £75,000.00 related to future care.
Summary
The significance of the Care report in this matter failed to support the claim of future care by the Claimant himself in respect of 2 dependants that were severely disabled.
This ultimately had a large impact on the final quantum awarded.
When valuing quantum, always ensure the evidence provided is sufficient to support the same.
Sarah Slesser, Legal Costs Service Manager
04.04.2024