Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Robshaw v United Lincolnshire Hospitals

338 words (1 pages) Case Summary

21st Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Robshaw v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 923



The claimant suffered from severe cerebral palsy due to mismanagement of his birth. He required full time care for the remainder of his life. He was able to self feed to a very limited extent but was largely dependent on others to feed him. He was also unable to remain in his home without significant changes to the property to accommodate his extensive needs. The defendant accepted liability in negligence but disputed the quantum of damages.


The approach of the court to the quantification of damages in such a case as in issue. In particular, there was an issue as to whether the claimant should be classified as ‘self fed’ or ‘fed by others' for the purpose of estimating his life expectancy. A further issue was whether the damages for accommodation should reflect the cost of demolishing and entirely rebuilding the claimant’s property, or merely of adapting it.


In terms of general approach, Foskett J stated that:

“…it all comes down eventually to the court’s evaluation of what is reasonable in all the circumstances” (para 42).

With regard to the life expectancy issue, the judge based his assessment on a figure in between the starting points for claimants who were ‘self feeding’ and those ‘fed by others’, in order to accurately reflect the complexity if his position.

With regard to the accommodation issue, the judge determined that adapting rather than rebuilding the property did not constitute reasonable mitigation, and therefore the defendant was liable for the full cost of demolishing and rebuilding the claimant’s home. The assessment of the claimant's needs was generous, with the judge even allowing his claim for the construction of a swimming pool.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles