Claimant’s decision to undergo amputation was a novus actus (Haley v Newcold Ltd)
PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: In this personal injury claim, HHJ Walsh found that the claimant’s decision to undergo a below-knee amputation of his injured leg was a novus actus interveniens for which the defendant was not responsible in law. Surveillance evidence had showed that he was walking normally even very close to the amputation date, and he was partaking in activities such as airsoft on a weekly basis right up to the amputation. In the circumstances, the judge held that the amputation was not caused by pain or loss of function from the index accident. The claimant’s motivation remained unclear, but the costs should not be borne by the defendant. Written by David Juckes, barrister at Hailsham Chambers.