Case highlights double recovery issue

Martins v Choudhary

(Court of Appeal - 20 December 2007)

This case involved a claim of statutory harassment with an element of racism. The claimant was travelling with his wife when the defendant collided into him. The defendant allegedly pursued a course of conduct against the claimant, which included racist remarks.

The claimant was successful at the first instance. The judge made an injunction against the defendant to prevent him from harassing the claimant, his staff, his family and witnesses. The defendant continued to harass witnesses, which resulted in committal proceedings and a protraction of the proceedings.

At the hearing of quantum, the judge considered the effect of the vehicle assault and the harassment on the claimant's psychiatric health.

The judge said that the claimant had developed a generalised anxiety state, which included experiencing claustrophobia, panic attacks, jumpiness, sleeplessness and constant rumination on the event. His relationship with his wife and children had been affected and he contemplated suicide. The claimant had sought help from his GP and was on prescribed anti-depressants. Also, due to the defendant's litigation conduct and harassment of witnesses, the claimant's fears had not been allowed to subside as otherwise would have happened.

The judge allowed an award for the psychiatric injury and a separate one for injury to feelings due to harassment. The defendant appealed the award on the basis that the award should have been on a global basis covering both the psychiatric injury and injury to feelings.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and said that there was "no hard and fast rule about whether separate awards should be made. It will all depend on facts of the individual case".

If a psychiatric injury was very modest then a global award may be more convenient. If the injury was substantial, as in this case, then it is helpful if the judge separates awards as it leads to better understanding of the thought process behind the award. However, the judge must take care to avoid double recovery.

COMMENT

In cases where there has been a substantial psychiatric injury and harassment, the need to consider the possibility of separate awards being made must be considered when assessing quantum. Lucy Stranney, BLM Manchester

The following law report contributed by specialist insurance practice Berrymans Lace Mawer first appeared in Post Magazine on 31 January 2008.

Disclaimer: The law report contains information of general interest about current legal issues, it does not present a complete or comprehensive statement of the law, nor does it constitute legal advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in any particular case.