header-logo header-logo

25 March 2010 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Belt up?

Denning’s guidelines stand the test of time, says Karen O’Sullivan

During Lord Denning’s 20 year tenure as Master of the Rolls and head of the civil side of the Court of Appeal he had an enormous impact upon the development of the law and was credited for his simple, clear and direct style of judgment. In celebrated decisions he championed the deserted wife and gave property rights to cohabitees. Somewhat less famous, but nonetheless important to those dealing with personal injury claims, were the guidelines he provided for apportioning liability in cases where a claimant fails to wear a seatbelt.

His judgment in Froom v Butcher [1975] 3 All ER 520 sets out an easy to follow formula:
l  If the failure to wear a seatbelt made no difference to the injuries sustained then there should be no deduction for contributory negligence.
l If the seatbelt would have reduced the claimant’s injuries then a deduction of 15% should be made for contributory negligence.
l If the injuries would have been entirely avoided by the claimant wearing a seatbelt

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll