Description
The pursuer claimed damages for injuries sustained in a road traffic accident on 15th August 2007. Liability was admitted, and so the issues at proof focused solely on quantum. Evidence was lead before Lady Stacey in July 2010.
The pursuer suffered a whiplash injury, which resulted in ongoing back pain and she also developed an adjustment disorder which remained untreated. Having retired early from her job as a social worker, the pursuer started her own business as a tattoo artist in July 2006 – at the age of 55. As a result of her ongoing back problems, her evidence was that she could only now work 3 days a week – compared to 6 days before the accident. Unfortunately, when she had the accident the pursuer was in the process of establishing her business and developing her reputation, and this made the accurate assessment of her future earnings loss problematic. Although she had no prior experience as a tattoo artist, the evidence was that she was highly regarded within the tattoo world, and had a loyal following of customers. Clients would have to wait a number of weeks for an appointment. The defenders sought to argue that no allowance should be made at all for future wage loss. They contended there was insufficient evidence that would allow the Court to assess her loss, and that a forensic accountant would be required. This proposition was not accepted by the Lord Ordinary, and the pursuer's approach was preferred. In the circumstances it was accepted that a broad brush approach could be taken. The defenders argued for damages in the region of £13406 and £16717. Lady Stacey awarded £65,858.
The pursuer was represented by Amber Galbraith of Compass Chambers.
