header-logo header-logo

TORT

08 February 2007
Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Aerospace Publishing Ltd v Thames Water Utilities [2007] EWCA Civ 3, [2007] All ER (D) 02 (Jan)

The defendant was a water undertaker for the purposes of the Water Industry Act 1991 (WIA 1991). One of its mains water pipes burst. A considerable quantity of the escaped water entered premises occupied by the claimants. In proceedings brought by the claimants, the defendant admitted liability pursuant to s 209, WIA 1991. One issue was whether the claimants could recover the cost of staff time.

HELD The fact and extent of the diversion of staff time must be properly established. If claimants do not adduce evidence which it would have been reasonable to adduce, they are at risk of a finding that this has not been established. The claimants also had to establish that the diversion had caused significant disruption to their businesses.

Even though it might be that strictly the claim should be cast in terms of a loss of revenue attributable to the diversion of staff time, despite this, in the ordinary case, unless the defendant could establish the contrary, it is reasonable for the court to infer from the disruption that, had their time not been thus diverted, the staff would have applied it to activities which would, directly or indirectly, have generated revenue in an amount at least equal to the costs for employing them during that time.

Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
back-to-top-scroll