Compensation is for Financial Not Emotional Loss

Thomas v Kwik Save Stores Ltd (TLR 27 June CA)

Three weeks after Mrs Thomas fell in the defendant’s shop breaking her femur, she collapsed and died from a pulmonary embolism. She had not been in good health, suffering from osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, diabetes and high blood pressure. She had been unable to walk very far and her condition had become progressively worse. The judge in awarding the widower claimant £50,000 had clearly been affected by the fact that the claimant had lost a close and loving companion and, if it were in the court’s power to award damages for that, it would have been a pleasure to do so. But under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 the court is restricted to an assessment of loss based on what the claimant had lost in money terms. The case was a classic example of one in which the multiplier/multiplicand approach to assessing damages was wholly inappropriate. Mrs Thomas could have become a burden rather than a benefit to the claimant. The deceased was carrying out a substantial proportion of those services for the claimant in the house which could be described as housekeeping services, but less than a full-time housekeeper would provide. The cost of a housekeeper was a poor basis for determining the value of those services, diminishing as they were bound to do. The award was reduced to £20,000. The judge had also seriously overvalued the award for pain and suffering. It was compensation for only three weeks. His award of £5,000 was reduced to £2,500.