H West & Son Ltd v Shephard
A claimant who is unconscious or unaware of her condition is still entitled to substantial damages for loss of amenity, because the loss of amenity is assessed objectively.
Facts
Mrs Shephard, aged 41, was seriously injured in a road accident caused by the defendant's lorry driver. She suffered severe brain damage and was paralysed in all four limbs. She was unable to speak, and there was some doubt about the extent to which she was aware of her condition. She was likely to live for about five years. The trial judge awarded her £17,500 in general damages for pain and suffering and loss of amenity.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held, by a majority, that the award should stand. Lord Morris said that damages for loss of amenity are awarded for the fact of the deprivation of the claimant's ability to enjoy life, which is assessed objectively, and not only for the claimant's awareness of her loss. Damages for pain and suffering, however, depend on the claimant's awareness of pain. The fact that Mrs Shephard might not fully understand her condition did not mean that she should receive only a small award for loss of amenity.
Related cases on defences and damages
- Baker v TE Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 1 WLR 966
- Dann v Hamilton [1939] 1 KB 509
- Froom v Butcher [1976] QB 286
- Gray v Thames Trains Ltd [2009] UKHL 33, [2009] 1 AC 1339
- Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146
- Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust [2020] UKSC 43, [2021] AC 563
- Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Shatwell [1965] AC 656
- Jackson v Murray [2015] UKSC 5, [2015] 2 All ER 805
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.
