Machinery Injury Compensation Claim

Sarojini Warnakulasuriya (Widow & Administratrix Of The Estate Of Ravindra Warankulasuriya (Deceased)) V Montana Bakery Ltd (2004)

The claimant, a 34-year-old woman, received £235,000 for the death of her husband in an accident at work in January 2002. The claimant and her daughters suffered a loss of services as a husband and father as a result of the accident.

Claimant: Female: Widowed, 33 years old at date of accident; 34 years old at date of settlement. The claimant was the widow of the deceased ('W') who died on 26 January 2002, aged 43.

Employers' Liability, Industrial Accident: On 26 January 2002, W, who was an engineer, was crushed to death when machinery he was repairing fell on him.

The claimant brought an action against the defendant alleging that it was negligent in the health and safety duties it owed towards its employees, which caused the accident.

Liability initially disputed, but subsequently admitted.

Injuries: W died instantly as a result of the accident.

Effects: W's death left the claimant without a husband and his two daughters, who were aged three years old and one year old at the date of the settlement, without a father. The claimant and her daughters suffered a loss of dependency and services as a husband and father as a result of W's death.
Out of Court Settlement: £235,000 total damages.

Breakdown of General Damages: Pain, suffering and loss of amenity: £1,000.

Breakdown of Special Damages: Bereavement (including interest): £8,305.50; Funeral and miscellaneous costs: £5,377; Past loss of DIY costs: £2,000; Paternal services: £10,000.

Background to damages: The main issue in the case concerned the earnings dependency. Although W was 43 at the time of his death, he had only recently commenced his career as a graduate engineer. He had studied engineering as a mature part-time student and was in his first job since graduating.

As a newly qualified graduate engineer, W was on a relatively low salary. The defendant argued that the dependency should be based on W's salary at the time of his death, with no allowance for future increases. The claimant argued that this was unrealistic and that the deceased would have progressed in his career. The claimant referred to the New Earnings Survey, which showed that the average engineer would expect a higher salary than the deceased was earning at the time of his death.

The other point of contention concerned the age at which the children's dependency would end. It was argued by the claimant that cultural expectations would have continued the dependency until W reached 65 years of age, by which time the youngest child would have been 23 years old. The defendant however argued that dependency would have ended five years earlier, which the youngest child reached 18 years old.

Under the terms of the settlement order approved by the court, the dependency for each child was £15,000.

QBD (Altman J) 11/11/2003

LTLPI 6/4/2004 (Unreported elsewhere)

Document No.: AM0900689