The claimant, a 22-year-old man, received £148,566 for a deep laceration to his non-dominant wrist sustained when he tripped at school in November 2003. He experienced problems with moving his hand and fingers and was likely to suffer disadvantage to his career because it limited his keyboard skills.
Claimant: Male: 17 years old at date of accident; 22 years old at date of settlement.
Occupiers' Liability: On November 24, 2003, the claimant (C) was playing with a rugby ball with a group of friends in the corridor of the boarding house of the defendant school (D) when he tripped and fell into a glass panel in a door. He put his hand out to protect himself but the glass broke and his hand went through the glass.
C sustained injury and brought an action against D alleging that it was negligent in various respects, in particular in failing to ensure that the door was fitted with adequate safety glass.
Liability admitted. However, D alleged that C had been 50 per cent contributorily negligent.
Injuries: C sustained an extensive deep laceration to his non-dominant left wrist.
Effects: C was taken to hospital where he underwent an operation to repair his left wrist and forearm and the divided structures. To repair the radial artery a vein graft was taken from C's left leg.
C had to undergo extensive physiotherapy. He experienced problems with manipulating small and fiddly objects and with the positioning of the thumb when grasping and gripping. The side-to-side mobility of his fingers was also reduced and as a result he found it difficult to touch type. He was also limited to using only six or seven fingers when typing which reduced his keyboard skills. C's little finger stuck out of the side of his hand and so caught on objects. He found it difficult to squeeze his index finger towards his middle finger as though crossing his fingers and his index finger stuck out a little from the other fingers.
C wore a glove on his left hand in cooler weather as it became cold and stiff. He suffered from spasms in the hand if he rested the ulna border of the forearm against an edge.
C also sustained significant scarring on his left forearm and his left ankle.
C had won a design and technology scholarship and had excelled in the subject. However, following the accident he was unable to pursue it as a career due to his injury. At the date of settlement he was in his final year of studying for a business management degree at university and was expected to achieve a 2.1. Statements from people who had seen C in work placements demonstrated that whilst he was very able, charismatic and highly employable, he would suffer some disadvantages because of his handicap in respect of keyboard skills. That was likely to be more than a theoretical disadvantage to his career. C was likely to experience problems with day-to-day tasks, do-it-yourself work and similar activities.
Prognosis: C's symptoms were not expected to improve or deteriorate with time or use of the hand. However, he could improve the position of his thumb by undergoing a tendon transfer and his forearm scar could be revised, although it would always remain visible. The operations would require up to eight weeks away from manual activities, during which he would require care.
Out of Court Settlement: £148,566 total damages.
Background to damages: C allowed for up to 20 per cent contributory negligence when considering the settlement figure.
The sixth edition of the Ogden tables was considered when looking at the future loss of earnings and prejudice on the labour market. D had argued that it was appropriate to allow for future disadvantage on the labour market by providing a modest Smith v Manchester award. As C had not obtained a job at the date of settlement, he used figures for average graduate earnings and adopted a multiplier discount of 0.765 as the mid-point between the pre-accident and post-accident discount figures.
The case was settled on a global basis with no particular breakdown of damages. However, the following breakdown was estimated by the claimant's solicitors on a full liability basis:
Breakdown of General Damages: Pain, suffering and loss of amenity: £25,000; Future medical costs: £5,500; Future loss of earnings due to operations: £2,170; Future loss of earnings due to injuries: £100,000; Future gratuitous care costs following operations: £1,350; Future cost of help with everyday tasks at two hours per day: £21,000; Future cost of do-it-yourself work, gardening and household tasks: £23,000; Interest on generals: £560.
Breakdown of Special Damages: Miscellaneous past expenses including parent's loss of earnings and care costs: £6,252; Interest: £868.
Roderick Noble instructed by Henmans LLP (Oxford) for the claimant. Badhams Law for the defendant.
Document No. AM0201353 Reproduced by kind permission of Lawtel (www.lawtel.com)