Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
That on 14 August 2005 at about 9.30 pm the pursuer was driving her Fiat Punto vehicle registration number P41 KSD on the A80 trunk road travelling towards Glasgow . There were two passengers in her vehicle her son, then aged 6 and her niece, then age 13.
That the pursuer's vehicle was struck from behind by motor vehicle registration number N516 OSU driven by John Hood. The defenders are the insurers of the vehicle.
That as a result of the collision the pursuer's vehicle spun off the road and eventually collided head on with a lamppost on the grass verge. The vehicle driven by John Hood also collided with a lamppost. Both vehicles were damaged.
That it is a matter of admission that John Hood was responsible for said collision and that the defenders, as Mr Hood's insurers, are liable to the pursuer for the damage occasioned to her vehicle and the injuries caused to her.
That as a result of the accident the pursuer sustained damages in that she had to pay a �250 excess on her insurance policy, her car seat and hands free phone kit were damaged and had to be replaced at a cost of �99.98. She also incurred sundry services at a cost of �50 and suffered inconvenience which was fairly assessed at �47.50.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.