How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • Go back-and-forth until satisfied
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask ChrisB4147 Your Own Question
ChrisB4147
ChrisB4147,
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 152
Experience:  Expert
112350272
Type Your Law Question Here...
ChrisB4147 is online now

How does a Judge would set about calculating a lump sum

This answer was rated:

how does a Judge would set about calculating a lump sum award of damages

Hi, thanks for the question.  I’m Chris and I’m a Solicitor in litigation matters. I will be happy to assist you and hope to provide a full response as quickly as possible.

This is a question and answer service rather than an instant chat service, and I may not be able to reply immediately. However, rest assured that I am dealing with your question and will get back to you as soon as I can.

I have a few questions if you don’t mind, just so I can clarify your position. This will assist me in providing you with a comprehensive answer. Would this be in relation to a personal injury matter? Could you provide me some background? Many thanks.

Customer: replied 14 days ago.
this is based on the livingstone v rawyards coal co case 1880

Ok. What’s the background. How similar is it?

Customer: replied 14 days ago.
User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the houses on the surface. If damages are to be awarded at all, the aim must be to put an injured party: ‘in the same position as he would have been in if he had not suffered the wrong for which he is now getting his compensation or reparation’
Lord Blackburne said: ‘I do not think there is any difference of opinion as to its being a general rule that, where any injury is to be compensated by damages, in settling the sum of money to be given for reparation of damages you should as nearly as possible get that sum of money which will put the party who has been injured, or who has suffered, in the same position as he would have been in if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is now getting his compensation or reparation. That must be qualified by a great many things which may arise – such, for instance, as by the consideration whether the damage has been maliciously done, or whether it has been done with full knowledge that the person doing it was doing wrong. There could be no doubt that there you would say that everything would be taken into view that would go most against the wilful wrongdoer–many things which you would properly allow in favour of an innocent mistaken trespasser would be disallowed as against a wilful and intentional trespasser on the ground that he must not qualify his own wrong, and various things of that sort.’

Well clearly done you homework and this caseis a good piece of law when it comes to general compensation matters. Going back to your original question, the judge will be considering a lump-sum based on precedent. They will have a look at previous cases where compensation has been provided and that level of compensation and they will compare the facts to the case in front of it. There is no definitive calculation but they will use their general judgement for a level of compensation. Naturally, in order to get compensation there has to be a liability i

Sorry it cut off. There has to be liability admitted or determined first and only then can compensation be considered.

I hope I’ve provided the information you were seeking? If you need more help, please let me know so l can continue to assist you. Otherwise, thank you for using JustAnswer. All the best.

ChrisB4147 and 2 other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 14 days ago.
no you were a great help thank you

No problem. Many thanks.

Customer: replied 14 days ago.
hi i have another question. can you explain to what extent the concept of ‘assumption of responsibility’ has sufficient clarity as a basis for determining whether an actionable duty of care exists for the purposes of recovering economic loss please

As this is another question, could you please start a new question thread so it can be dealt with in the usual way. Many thanks.

Customer: replied 14 days ago.
i tried to but it’s coming up with an error :(