- Determining litigation capacity as a preliminary issue (King v Wright Roofing Co Ltd)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Personal Injury & Clinical Negligence analysis: The High Court considered the claimant’s capacity to litigate and manage any fund awarded in his personal injury claim applying the principles and the statutory test set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005), following the defendant’s challenge to the claimant’s status as a protected party and a protected beneficiary as per CPR 21.2. Mr King sustained a serious brain injury. He initially appeared to be able to understand the litigation process but after concerns were raised about his ability to take on board professional advice, weigh up information and make decisions, the claimant’s neuropsychiatric and psychological experts concluded that he lacked insight into his own condition and lacked the capacity to litigate his personal injury claim and manage his finances. The defendant challenged this conclusion and instructed their own experts to assess him who maintained he did have capacity. The matter was listed for a two day trial to determine as a preliminary issue both the claimant’s litigation capacity and his capacity to manage any damages awarded. Written by Esther Maclachlan, barrister, at 9 Gough Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial