Raleys Solicitors v Barnaby
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY
- LORD JUSTICE DAVIS
- LORD JUSTICE FLOYD
Areas of Law
- Employment Law
- Tort Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Mr. Barnaby, suffering from Vibration White Finger, sued Raleys solicitors for professional negligence after abandoning a services claim on their advice and settling for a lower compensation amount. The Leeds County Court found Raleys negligent and awarded damages for the loss of a chance of further recovery. Raleys appealed, arguing a misapplication of legal principles regarding causation. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, confirming that Raleys' negligent advice caused the abandonment of the services claim and warranted the awarded damages.
Judgment
Lord Justice Maurice Kay: :
It is well known that coalminers were susceptible to Vibration White Finger (VWF), a form of Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) resulting from excessive use of vibratory tools. In July 1998, the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the High Court finding British Coal negligent in exposing miners to such excessive vibration. The Department for Trade and Industry (DTI) set up a compensation scheme (the Scheme) to provide tariff-based compensation to miners who had been exposed to vibration and who suffered from VWF. Mr Barnaby made a claim under the Scheme. He had been employed by the National Coal Board and later British Coal from 6 October 1976 to 7 November 1992 and by Specialist Mining Services Ltd from 8 January 1993 to 28 March 1994. In order to pursue his claim, he instructed Raleys solicitors. On 6 December 2002 he agreed to settle his claim for a total of £10,822.01 plus interest. This sum embraced claims for general damages and handicap on the labour market. He had also indicated an intention to make a claim for services which were required as a consequence of his disability. However, he abandoned his services claim following advice by Raleys. He later commenced proceedings against Raleys for professional negligence in relation to that advice.
On 25 July 2013 in Leeds County Court His Honour Judge Gosnell (the Judge) found negligence on the part of Raleys and awarded Mr Barnaby damages of £5,925 on the basis of the loss of a chance of further recovery from the Scheme as to which he would have had a seventy five per cent prospect of success. On this appeal, Raleys contend that the judge was wrong to find a causal connection between the (now) admitted negligence and the failure of the services claim.
The Scheme
The judgment below contains the following summary of the scheme and its operation in relation to services claims:
“4. The Scheme was administered for the DTI by IRISC Claims Management (“IRISC”) in accordance with the terms of a Claims Handling Arrangement (“CHA”) dated 22 nd January 1999 as amended from time to time. The CHA was an agreement between IRISC and firms of Solicitors who belonged to the VWF Litigation Solicitors Group (“VWFLSG”). After the agreement was executed there were continuing negotiations between VWFLSG and the DTI and other mining contractors like SMS in relation to the claims as a whole and services claims in particular. Where disputes arose they were either resolved by agreemen