Apportionment of Damages for Contributory Negligence: Appellate Review, Relative Blameworthiness and Causal Potency

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Apportioning damages for contributory negligence is bread and butter work of
trial courts throughout the United Kingdom.' Both contributory negligence and
apportionment are very frequently in issue in negligence cases and, when they are,
they are often key points in dispute. It is relatively rare, however, for the law in this
area to be dealt with at any length on appeal. There are various possible causes of
this situation, one of which is the well-established principle that appellate courts
should disturb findings of a trial judge in relation to contributory negligence or
apportionment only where those findings are clearly wrong. Jackson v Murray is,
therefore, an important case. It is the first occasion on which the Supreme Court has
engaged with this part of the law other than in passing. The decision casts light on
several issues in the law of contributory negligence and apportionment. It also raises
some questions.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)367-373
Number of pages7
JournalEdinburgh Law Review
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Apportionment of Damages for Contributory Negligence: Appellate Review, Relative Blameworthiness and Causal Potency'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this