Brittain v Garner [1989] (The Times, 18 Feb)
QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES – LOSS OF A CHANCE
Facts
The claimant sought damages for the loss of his career, arguing that this should be quantified based not only on his present salary but on the ‘career ladder’ which he had been climbing and the promotions which he would have been likely to attain in the future had he had the opportunity to continue to progress.
Issues
The main issue was what approach the court should adopt to the quantification of damages in a case where the claimant is on a ‘career ladder’ and has lost the opportunity of promotion to each subsequent stage of his career.
Decision/Outcome
The approach set out by the court was to adopt a different multiplicand to reflect the increasing value of each stage of the career which the claimant would have had the opportunity to pursue. Conversely, a decreasing multiplier was adopted for each stage to reflect the decreasing likelihood that this stage would have been attained ‘but for’ the defendant’s negligence. In this way, the multiplier is divided into a number of periods during which the claimant might have been earning a different figure.
It should be noted that this is at odds with the usual approach of the court to the issue of quantifying damages for loss of a career, established in previous cases such as Housecroft v Burnett [1986] 1 All ER 332. In this case, the court used the somewhat simpler method of selecting single multiplicand based on the likely average salary of the claimant’s career.
Updated 19 March 2026
This article accurately describes the approach taken in Brittain v Garner [1989] and its contrast with Housecroft v Burnett [1986] 1 All ER 332. The principles discussed remain part of the broader framework for quantifying damages for loss of a career or loss of a chance in personal injury litigation. However, readers should be aware that this area of law has developed considerably since 1989. In particular, the approach to multipliers in personal injury cases is now heavily influenced by the Ogden Tables (actuarial tables for use in personal injury and fatal accident cases), currently in their eighth edition (2020), which are used alongside Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345 and subsequent case law to assess future loss. Courts retain a degree of flexibility in loss of a chance and career ladder cases, and the stepped approach described in Brittain v Garner continues to be recognised as a legitimate method where future career progression is genuinely uncertain. The article’s description of the legal principles is broadly accurate but should be read in the context of this subsequent development of the law on multipliers and actuarial evidence.
