Baker v Willoughby
Where a claimant suffers a second injury that has the same effect as an earlier injury caused by the defendant, the defendant remains liable for the effects of the first injury.
Facts
Mr Baker's leg was injured in a road accident caused by Mr Willoughby's negligence, leaving him with a permanent disability. Before the trial, he was shot in the same leg by armed robbers at his work, and the leg had to be amputated. Mr Willoughby argued that his liability for the effects of the injury ended when the leg was amputated, because from then on the disability was caused by the shooting.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that Mr Willoughby remained liable for the loss caused by the original injury, including after the amputation. Lord Reid said that the claimant was not compensated for the physical injury itself, but for the loss he suffered as a result, such as his loss of the ability to enjoy life and his reduced earning capacity. The second injury did not diminish the loss caused by the first, and if the defendant's liability were reduced, the claimant would be undercompensated, because the robbers would only be liable for the additional loss they caused.
Related cases on causation
- Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] UKHL 20, [2006] 2 AC 572
- Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428
- Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613
- Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41, [2005] 1 AC 134
- Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002] UKHL 22, [2003] 1 AC 32
- Gregg v Scott [2005] UKHL 2, [2005] 2 AC 176
- Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] AC 750
- Jobling v Associated Dairies Ltd [1982] AC 794
Studying tort law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
