||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 202 (Jun)
||Queen's Bench Division
Judge MacDuff QC
||Andrew Spink QC (instructed by Irwin Mitchell) for the claimants.
||Charles Haddon-Cave QC and John Russell (instructed by Field Fisher Waterhouse) for the defendant.
||1 May 2003
Damages and compensation - Assessment of damages - Gratuitous care - Existence of threshold for award - Approach to assessing parents' care of sick children.
There was no threshold requirement for the award of compensation in respect of gratuitous care. When the illness became sufficiently serious to require significant extra care over and above that which would be given anyway in the ordinary course of family life, the carer was to be compensated. In relation to parents looking after children, it would be artificial to adopt the traditional approach to assessing damages, namely assessing number of hours, applying a commercial rate, and then discounting, where the parent was providing a mixture of love support and care. However, it was possible to understand the general nature of the extra burden placed upon the parent, and to make a proportionate and proper award in all the circumstances.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary