Jobling v Associated Dairies Ltd [1981] UKHL 3
Supervening Illness – Negligence – Law of Tort – Causation – Loss of Earnings
Facts
The complainant managed a butcher’s shop for Associated Dairies Ltd. In January 1973 he slipped on the floor and suffered a slipped disc at work due to his employer’s negligence. As a result of his injuries, he was limited to light work and his earning capacity was reduced by 50 per cent. In 1976, before the trial, he developed cervical myelopathy, an unrelated disease which made him wholly incapable of work by the end of September that year. The appeal proceeded on the basis that the disease had not been present in a latent or dormant form at the date of the accident.
Law Teacher writing support
Writing a law essay?
We choose a writer who is an expert in your area of law and qualified to at least the academic level you select. Most of our writers hold a master’s degree or PhD, have teaching experience, or both.
Send us your question and, if you wish, any marking criteria. We’ll write an essay to your instructions.
Issues
The trial judge applied Baker v Willoughby and awarded loss of earnings beyond the onset of the later illness. The Court of Appeal reduced that award. Mr Jobling appealed to the House of Lords, seeking to restore the trial judge’s award. The issue was whether the employer remained liable for continuing loss of earnings after the independent illness would have prevented Mr Jobling from working in any event.
Decision/Outcome
The House of Lords dismissed Mr Jobling’s appeal. The illness was one of the ordinary vicissitudes of life which had to be taken into account in assessing his loss. Once that contingency had actually occurred before trial, the court had to use the known facts rather than calculate earnings on the assumption that he would otherwise have remained able to work.
The employer was therefore not liable for loss of earnings after the myelopathy had rendered him wholly incapable of work at the end of September 1976. Compensation for earlier loss of earnings remained. Other awards, including compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, were not in issue in the House of Lords.
The Lords criticised the reasoning in Baker v Willoughby, which concerned successive tortious injuries, and declined to extend it to this independent, naturally occurring illness. They did not reverse the decision in Baker on its own facts.
Further citations: [1982] AC 794; [1981] 3 WLR 155; [1981] 2 All ER 752.
Judgment: House of Lords, 25 June 1981.
