8. Conclusion

There are many differences between English and French law, but this chapter has illustrated that the liberalism of the French system is sometimes more apparent than real. Both systems are alive to common policy considerations.

Although the French judiciary rarely refers to policy concerns explicitly, we have seen that such considerations have had a real impact on both the types of loss recoverable and the quantification of damages. The courts have acted on perceived standards of morality in precluding mistresses from claiming damages for dependency loss and douleur morale, and discouraging the pursuit of excessive profit in the construction sector.⁴⁷² The fear of overwhelming liability of the state, reminiscent of the English law floodgates concern,⁴⁷³ has been recognized by commentators and Commissaires du Gouvernement to have militated against actions by secondary victims in general,⁴⁷⁴ and for douleur morale in particular.⁴⁷⁵ Judicial protection of the public purse may also be detected.⁴⁷⁶

Many of these concerns have ostensibly been cast aside in favour of an (p.238) increased protection of the victims of administrative wrongdoing. Although the rules pertaining to damage seem liberal in principle, they are nonetheless still underpinned by strong control mechanisms, such as rare findings of requisite certainty,⁴⁷⁷ a careful examination of causation,⁴⁷⁸ parsimony in awards,⁴⁷⁹ and restrictions on the calculation of quantum.⁴⁸⁰

It is clear that the measurement of damages for personal injury and dependency loss reflects unfavourably upon the French system.⁴⁸¹ Similarly, the attitude of the courts to collateral benefits means that an English victim is often able to gain a windfall by means of double recovery, whereas the French practice of effective subrogation rights reduces the victim's ‘in the pocket’ financial remedy.⁴⁸² The extensive social security system in France does provide injured victims with important alternative sources of reparation. Given the delays in the administration of justice,⁴⁸³ it is tempting to conclude that a proportion of potential personal injury claimants simply rely upon the social welfare system.⁴⁸⁴

Notes:

(1) England: Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co (1880) 5 App. Cas. 25, 39. France: CE 21 Mar. 1947, Aubry [1947] Rec 123.

(2) See A. Burrows, Remedies for Torts and Breach of Contract (2nd edn, London, 1994) chap. 5 .

(3) Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129.

(4) Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129.

(5) Ibid.

(6) See AB v South West Water Services Ltd [1993] QB 507.

(7) Ibid.

(8) Ibid.

(9) Kuddus v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Constabulary [2001] 2 WLR 1789. Their Lordships specifically left open the question of the availability of exemplary damages under the Human Rights Act: [2001] 2 WLR 1789, 1802 and 1815.

(10) P. R. Ghandhi, ‘Punitive Damages Against the Police’ (1990) 134 SJ 357 .

(11) CE 13 Apr. 1983, Poux [1983] Rec 868. See B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédic de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1988) para. 25 ; Guettier, 167. But see CE 11 Mar. 1994, CSA [1994] Rec 117.

(12) The certainty of loss and ultimate measure of damages are now considered to be questions which fall within the ‘sovereign power of assessment” of the lower court: see C. Pollmann, ‘Contrôle de Cassation du Conseil d'Etat’, RDP 1996.1653.

(13) R. David, English Law and French Law: A Comparison in Substance (London, 1980) 166 ; J. Bell, S. Boyron, and S. Whittaker, Principles of French Law (Oxford, 1998) 396 .

(14) Prof, von Bar has observed in his authoritative study of comparative tort law that punitive damages are by no means unique to the common law, which merely imposes them more openly than civil law jurisdictions: C. von Bar, The Common European Law of Torts (Oxford University Press, 1998) i, para. 611 .

(15) Laws of 16 July 1980 and 8 Feb. 1995. See Chapus, para. 1035.

(16) CE 25 Feb. 1972, Pollack RDP 1972.1558.

(17) Damages in French administrative law has not been a popular topic for doctrinal critique. But see generally I. Poirot-Mazères, ‘La Notion de Préjudice en Droit Administratif Francais’, RDP 1997.519; R. Chapelard, ‘Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans la Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’ (Thesis, L'Université de Grenoble, 1981); C. Paillard-Cormier, Le Préjudice en Droit Administratif Frangais (Thesis, L'Université de Paris II, 2000). I am very grateful to various members of the Conseil d'Etat who have discussed this topic with me, and who allowed me access to the internal documents (notes documentaires) of the Conseil d'Etat concerning the technique of the calculation of damages: Conseil d'Etat, Evaluation du Préjudice en cas de Dommages Corporels ou de Décès (i, ii, iii, and iv, 1989–2001).

(18) CE 25 Jan. 1978, Pavita, D.1979 Jurisprudence 143. This formula has been repeated many times since e.g. CE 21 Feb. 2000, Vogel, Req 195207.

(19) CE 22 Jan. 1993, Sannois et al. [1993] Rec 1028; CE 28 Apr. 1995, Société de Construction et de Genie Civil, Req 124276. Harking back to earlier hesitations in compensating any type of future loss: Deguergue, 493.

(20) Future loss is now regularly compensated by the courts: Chapus, para. 1409. But note that in a Government circular of 1995 concerning the circumstances in which public authorities can settle damages claims out of court, some caution is expressed about providing compensation for future loss: Circular of 6 Feb. 1995, D.1995 Législation 196, 198.

(21) Contrast the change in wording: A. de Laubadère, Traité de Droit Administratif (Paris, 1953) para. 948 and (7th edn, Paris, 1976) para. 1301 . See also H. Detton, ‘L'Evaluation des Indemnités’, EDCE 1953.52; R. Denoix de Saint Marc and D. Labetoulle, AJDA 1970.351.

(22) For instance, in respect of pretium doloris. See further sect. 4.1.1 below.

(23) See A. von Mehren and J. Gordley, The Civil Law System (2nd edn, Boston, Mass., 1977) 537 .

(24) R. Chapus, Responsabilité Publique et Responsabilité Privée: les Influences Réciproques des Jurisprudences Administrative et Judiciaire (Paris, 1954) para. 541 .

(25) Indeed, Chapus refers to the basic tenet that recovery may be made for all types of loss: ‘le principe de l'égale réparabilité de tous préjudices’ (Chapus, 1410).

(26) Markesinis and Deakin, 722.

(27) Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, s 4; Damages Act 1996, s 7(1); Limitation Act 1980, s 38(1).

(28) See T. Weir, ‘La Notion de Dommage en Responsabilité Civile’ in P. Legrand (ed.), Common Law: D'un Siècle L'autre (Cowansville, 1992) 13–15 .

(29) Specific note will be made in the text where different principles apply for other torts.

(30) It is impossible to give an exhaustive exegesis of this topic. In particular, no examination will be made of the frontier between contractual and extra-contractual administrative liability. Financial loss sustained by dependants of victims of fatal accidents—which may be seen as an example of pure economic loss (see discussion by D. Marshall, ‘Liability for Pure Economic Loss Negligently Caused—French and English Law Compared’ (1975) 24 ICLQ 748)—is examined in sect. 6 below.

(31) B. Feldthusen, Economic Negligence (3rd edn, Scarborough, 1994) ; R. Bernstein, Economic Loss (2nd edn, London, 1998) ; E. Banakas, Civil Liability for Pure Economic Loss (London, 1996) .

(32) Feldthusen, n. 31 above, 272–3; C. Harlow, ‘State Liability: Problem without Solution’ (1996) 6 NJCL 67, 76 .

(33) Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] 1 AC 398 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Murphy’).

(34) There is little mention of this topic in Deguergue's authoritative 800 page tome: Jurisprudence et Doctrine dans l'Elaboration du Droit de la Responsabilité Administrative (Paris, 1994).

(35) Murphy [1991] 1 AC 398.

(36) [1964] AC 465 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Hedley Byrne’).

(37) Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605; Henderson v Merrett Syndicates [1995] AC 145; Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830, 837.

(38) Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605, 638.

(39) Henderson v Merrett Syndicates [1995] AC 145, 181; Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830, 834.

(40) See, e.g., Reeman v Department of Transport [1997] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 648.

(41) Henderson v Merrett Syndicates [1995] AC 145, 180; Williams v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 830, 834.

(42) See further J. Morrell and R. Foster, Local Authority Liability (2nd edn., Bristol, 2001) chap. 9 .

(43) The Times, 25 Mar. 1981.

(44) [1997] 1 WLR 570. See also Lambert v West Devon BC [1997] JPL 735; Coats Patons v Birmingham Corporation [1971] LGR 356.

(45) See Chap. 4, sect. 2.1.2.1.

(46) Harris v Evans [1998] 3 All ER 522; Rowling v Takaro Properties Ltd [1988] AC 473, 502; Phelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council [1999] 1 All ER 421 (CA) now overruled: [2001] 2 AC 619.

(47) JGF Properties Ltd v Lambeth London Borough [1986] 1 EGLR 179; Haddow v Secretary of State for the Environment [1998] NPC 10 (QBD); Haddow v Tendring District Council (CA, 9 July 1998). In the recent case of Dart v Isle of Wight Council (QBD, 14 Feb. 2002), Gross J referred to the principle that in general, local planning authorities are not liable in damages for financial loss resulting from their negligent dealing with planning applications.

(48) Tidman v Reading Borough Council [1994] 3 PLR 72. See also Abdul Rauf Qazi v London Borough of Waltham Forest (QBD, 3 Aug. 1999).

(49) For a rare success see Lambert v West Devon BC [1997] JPL 735.

(50) Harris v Evans [1998] 3 All ER 522.

(51) Yuen Kun Yeu v Attorney General of Hong Kong [1988] AC 175; Minories Finance Ltd v Arthur Young [1989] 2 All ER 105; Davis v Radcliffe [1990] 2 All ER 536, 541.

(52) Murphy [1991] 1 AC 398; Philcox v Civil Aviation Authority, The Times, 8 June 1995; Gaisford v Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food, The Times, 19 July 1996.

(53) Jones v Department of Employment [1989] QB 1; Flynn v Department of Social Security (CA, 16 Nov. 1994).

(54) Strable v Dartford BC [1984] JPL 329; Lam v Brennan [1997] PIQR P488; Ryeford Homes Ltd v Sevenoaks District Council [1989] 2 EGLR 281.

(55) Partridge v General Medical Council [1890] 25 QB 90; Rowling v Takaro Properties Ltd [1988] AC 473. See also David v Abdul Cader [1963] 3 All ER 579 (based on delict under Roman-Dutch law); Ballantyne v City of Glasgow District Licensing Board 1987 SLT 745 (Scottish case).

(56) Feakins Ltd v Dover Harbour Board, The Times, 9 Sept. 1998.

(57) Arrowsmith, 228–9.

(58) See further Chap. 4, sect. 2.2.1.

(59) See Chap. 3, sect. 3.3.1.

(60) See R. v Secretary of State for Transport ex p Factortame Ltd (No 5) [2000] 1 AC 524.

(61) P. Craig, ‘Once More Unto the Breach: The Community, the State and Damages Liability’ (1997) 113 LQR 67 . See also the explicit damages remedy (for economic loss) in European public procurement legislation: S. Arrowsmith, The Law of Public and Utilities Procurement (London, 1996) 911 .

(62) CE 24 Mar. 1995, Req 129415. Figures are given in the currency in use when the judgment was handed down.

(63) Pure economic loss has been recovered in other areas: tax imposition (CE 31 Oct. 1990, Champagne [1990] Rec 309); public procurement (CE 10 Jan. 1986, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’ [1986] Rec 712; CAA Bordeaux 16 July 1998, Commune de Villefranche de Rouergue, Req 95BX01813).

(64) CE 25 Jan. 1978, Pavita, D.1979 Jurisprudence 143; CE 12 Mar. 1990, Gallichet, Req 68932.

(65) See J.-P. Demouveaux and B. Lamorlette, ‘Responsabilité en Matière d'Urbanisme’, Fascicule 870 (1998), 8 Juris-Classeur Administratif para. 121 .

(66) CE 12 Mar. 1990, Gallichet, Req 68932.

(67) CE 12 Nov. 1975, SCI ‘Residence du Pays d'Oc’ [1975] Rec 1260.

(68) CE 19 Feb. 1988, Petit et Cintract [1988] Rec 80.

(69) CE 12 Dec. 1984, SOCOMI, Req 41293.

(70) J.-P. Demouveaux and B. Lamorlette, ‘Responsabilité en Matière d'Urbanisme’, Fascicule 870 (1998), 8 Juris-Classeur Administratif, para. 142 ; A. Parmentier-Luget, ‘La Responsabilité Administrative en Matière d'Urbanisme’ (Thesis, L'Université de Poitiers, 1996) 111.

(71) CE 7 Jan. 1970, Rosier [1970] Rec 9.

(72) CE 11 May 1983, CEFIC, JCP 1983.II.20165; CE 6 Feb. 1987, SCI L'Empereur, Req 63614; CE 26 Oct. 1988, SCI Les Moulins d'Hyères [1988] Rec 382.

(73) CE 26 Jan. 1973, Driancourt [1973] Rec 78. This case is translated in the Appendix.

(74) CE 10 Oct. 1980, Ministre de la Santé et de la Securite Sociale, RDP 1981.1094.

(75) CAA Nantes 18 Dec. 1997, Société Hydro-Electrique du Moulin, Req 94NT00973.

(76) CE 29 May 1974, Reyboz [1974] Rec 326. See also the similar case of CAA Lyon 3 May 1993, Roux, Req 91LY01093.

(77) CE 23 June 1976, Société des Usines Laprade, Req 93865.

(78) See Chap. 5, sect. 2.3.1.

(79) See also B. Markesinis, ‘A Comparative Look at Certain Problems of Pure Economic Loss’ in N.E. Eastham and B. Krivy (eds.), The Cambridge Lectures 1981 (Toronto, 1982) ; K. Zweigert and H. Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd edn, Oxford, 1998) 627 .

(80) See, e.g., CE 11 July 1990, Desplanques, Req 77049. Note however that sometimes a small consolatory sum is awarded under the head of troubles dans les conditions d'existence: CE 23 Dec. 1988, Roger-Imbert, Req 75716.

(81) Courts will often cite the existence of comparative transactions to justify the calculation of the loss: e.g. CE 6 June 1969, Ducret [1969] Rec 954; CAA Lyon 3 May 1993, Roux, Req 91LY01093. See L.-M. Boucraut, La Réparation des Atteintes aux Biens dans le Contentieux des Responsabilités Civile et Administrative (Paris, 1993) para. 216 .

(82) E. Banakas, ‘Public Authority Liability for Pure Economic Loss: A Comparative Study of English, German and French Law’ (1992) 45 RHDI 39, 58 and Civil liability for Pure Economic Loss (London, 1996) 16–17.

(83) A database search of administrative court decisions reveals that a fraction of such claims are successful. A senior member of the Conseil d'Etat, writing extrajudicially, has even stated that ‘“lost profits” (manque à gagner), in other words the victim's failure to be enriched and to increase his estate, is not compensable, as such’: M.-A. Latournerie, ‘The Law of France’, in J. Bell and A. Bradley, Governmental Liability: A Comparative Study (London, 1991) 220 ). See also J.-P. Taugourdeau, ‘Le Caractère Certain et Direct du Préjudice en Matiere de Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’, AJDA 1974.508, 519.

(84) The cases in n. 72 above are dwarfed by the number of unsuccessful claims: J.-B. Auby, ‘La Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique en Matière d'Urbanisme’, Les Petites Affiches, N^o 54, 4 May 1988, 9, 13; Markesinis, Auby et al., 18. See for instance, CE 11 June 1999, SCI Barateau, Req 171407; CE 22 Jan. 1993, Sannois et al., [1993] Rec 1028; CAA Lyon 4 Oct. 1989, SCI Residence Chaillole [1989] Rec 335. Note also that many claims were thwarted by the statutory immunity for loss caused by servitudes under Art. L 160–5 of the Code de l'Urbanisme (see O. Ouzel, Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans le Contentieux du Permis de Construire (DEA Dissertation, L'Université de Paris II, 1991) 2 ). This immunity is subject to exceptions: CE 3 July 1998, Bitouzet, RFDA 1998.1243, due to the influence of human rights law (see further p. 264 below). See generally Chapus, para. 1411–1.

(85) See J.-M. André, ‘La Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique du Fait de Diverses Formes d'Engagements Non Contractuels de l'Administration’, AJDA 1976.20, 29. There are exceptions: CE 11 May 1956, Lesieur, AJDA 1956.300.

(86) In a section of his book covering préjudice immatériel consequent upon illegal acts, Boucraut relies upon surprisingly few cases: L-M. Boucraut, La Réparation des Atteintes aux Biens dans le Contentieux des Responsabilités Civile et Administrative (Paris, 1993) para. 211 .

(87) CG Braibant's conclusions in CE 26 May 1965, Tebaldini [1965] Rec 305, 309.

(88) See Médiateur de la République, Rapport 1998 (Paris, 1998) 232 .

(89) J.-P. Taugourdeau, ‘Le Caractère Certain et Direct du Préjudice en Matière de Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’, AJDA 1974.508; R. Chapelard, ‘Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans la Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’ (Thesis, L'Université de Grenoble, 1981) 22. See, e.g., CE 3 Oct. 1997, Jacquin, Req 149928.

(90) CE 12 Oct. 1990, Ségura, Req 98571; CAA Lyon 3 May 1993, Roux, Req 91LY01093.

(91) CE 25 July 1975, Ministre de la Santé Publique [1975] Rec 471; CE 16 Feb. 1983, Millet, Req 26440; CAA Nancy 3 Feb. 2000, Chope, Req 96NC02765.

(92) e.g. CE 17 Jan. 1975, Marion [1975] Rec 1260. Although large awards are sometimes made: CE 22 June 1992, Société Pont Royal Hotel, Req 59284.

(93) CE 20 May 1981, Ville de Clermont-Ferrand, Req 18005.

(94) CE 27 Nov. 1974, Amouzegh [1974] Rec 595. See also CE 20 Nov. 1981, Rodal, RDP 1982.1445.

(95) ‘Expert's Report.’ See, e.g., CE 21 Dec. 1966, Vincetti, RDP 1967.357. For further discussion of the use of experts' reports in French administrative law see Chap. 4, sect. 3.4.

(96) CE 27 Feb. 1987, SARL Sandwich-Yacht-France, Req 45538; CAA Lyon 17 Dec. 1990, Commune de Mezilhac, Req 90LY00250. See L.-M. Boucraut, La Réparation des Atteintes aux Biens dans le Contentieux des Responsabilités Civile et Administrative (Paris, 1993) para. 334 .

(97) CG Robineau's conclusions in CE 11 May 1983, CEFIC, JCP 1983.11.20165; CG Guillaume's conclusions in CE 6 Feb. 1987, SCI L'Empereur, Req 63614.

(98) Ibid. See also CAA Bordeaux 3 Dec. 1991, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’, Req 89BX00875.

(99) CE 15 Mar. 1968, Ministre de l'Industrie, RDP 1968.1124; CAA Bordeaux 3 Dec. 1991, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’, Req 89BX00875.

(100) CE 25 July 1975, Ministre de la Santé Publique [1975] Rec 471. See also CG Vigouroux's conclusions in CE 22 May 1987, Ministre des Affaires Sociales, Req 54289 (unpublished).

(101) Conclusions, n. 97 above. See also a, Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans le Contentieux du Permis de Construire (DEA Dissertation, L'Université de Paris II, 1991).

(102) CE 21 Dec. 1966, Vincetti, RDP 1967.357; CE 16 Nov. 1998, Sille, Req 175142.

(103) CG Frydman's conclusions in CE 24 Mar. 1995, SARL Nice Helicoptères, Req 129415.

(104) See K. Zweigert and H. Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd edn, Oxford, 1998) 627–8 .

(105) CE 28 Feb. 1986, Entreprise Blondet, AJDA 1986.399.

(106) e.g. CAA Paris 30 Mar. 1999, El Shikh, AJDA 1999.951; CE 30 Nov. 1973, Colliot, RDP 1974.1867; CE 11 July 1984, Jonon [1984] Rec 741; CAA Lyon 9 Dec. 1992, Gire [1992] Rec 1296. See J.-B. Auby, ‘La Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique en Matière d'Urbanisme’, Les Petites Affiches, 16 Aug. 1995, N^o 98, 9, 12; O. Cluzel, Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans le Contentieux du Permis de Construire (DEA Dissertation, L'Université de Paris II, 1991).

(107) Particularly in the planning sphere where damages are often reduced because the claimant was aware, or ought to have been aware, that the planning permission was unlawful: J.-B. Auby, ‘La Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique en Matière d'Urbanisme’, Les Petites Affiches, N^o 79, 3 July 1991, 18, 22. See the discussion at p. 179 above.

(108) For further discussion see Chap. 6.

(109) See B. Markesinis, ‘A Comparative Look at Certain Problems of Pure Economic Loss’ in N.E. Eastham and B. Krivy, (eds.), The Cambridge Lectures 1981 (Toronto, 1982) .

(110) There is now a graded standard of fault: Chap. 4, sect. 3.2.1.2.

(111) J.-F. Touchard, ‘A Propos de la Responsabilité Pour Faute de l'Administration Fiscale’, RDP 1992.785, 806; M. Cliquennois, ‘Essai Sur La Responsabilité de l'Etat du Fait de Ses Activités de Contrôle et de Tutelle’, Les Petites Affiches, N^o 98, 16 Aug. 1995, 4.

(112) CE 30 Nov. 2001, Kechichian, conclusions Seban, Les Petites Affiches, N^o 28, 7 Feb. 2002, 7, 12, 13.

(113) The plenary session of the Conseil d'Etat adopted the solution advocated by the CG Seban (CE 30 Nov. 2001, Kechichian, AJDA 2002.136) thus overturning the decision of the Cour Administrative d'Appel de Paris which had applied the lower standard of faute simple: CAA Paris 25 Jan. 2000, Kechichian, Req 93PA01250. A translation of the decision of the Conseil d'Etat may be found in the Appendix. Cf CAA Paris 30 Mar. 1999, El Shikh, AJDA 1999.951 (concerning the failure of BCCI, in a parallel claim to that brought in the English case of Three Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England [2001] UKHL 16). See the discussion of these decisions in M. Andenas and D. Fairgrieve, ‘Misfeasance in Public Office, Governmental Liability and European Influences’ (2002) 51 ICLQ 757 .

(114) See further p. 109 (faute lourde) and pp. 175–6 (causation) above.

(115) For further discussion see Chap. 8, sect. 3.1.

(116) Report 93/195, Blaenau Gwent Borough Council [1995] JPL 1055.

(117) Report 95/C/4589, Rushcliffe Borough Council [1997] JPL 1164. For the PCA's attitude to similar complaints see A.R. Mowbray, ‘A Right to Official Advice: The Parliamentary Commissioner's Perspective’ [1990] PL 68, 81–4 .

(118) Report 91/B/3837, Torbay Borough Council [1997] JPL 81. See also Report 99/C/493, cited in the Commission's Digest of Cases 2000, Section A: Commercial (Commission for Local Administration, London, 2001) 5.

(119) First Report of the PCA, 1989–90, The Barlow Clowes Affair (1989–90, HC 76).

(120) Observations by the Government on the Report of the PCA (1989–90, HC 99).

(121) See generally R. Hayward, Handbook of Land Compensation: Law and Valuation (London, 1995) .

(122) Burlin v Manchester CC [1976] 238 EG 891.

(123) Town and Country Planning Act 1990, s 107(1). See also similar procedures in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, ss 108(1), 203, and 204.

(124) Edney v Hertsmere BC [1997] RVR 251.

(125) Excel Ltd v Gravesend BC [1968] RVR 631.

(126) Hobbs v Somerset CC [1975] RVR 219. In the Alnwick saga (see [1998] JPL 417), a £4.6 million claim was made: reported in the Independent, 9 Sept. 1999.

(127) Criminal Justice Act 1988, s 133.

(128) See further Chap. 5, sect. 3.4.

(129) There are areas in which a claimant under English law has little remedy. Redress in the licensing sphere differs starkly in the French and English systems: tort law is restrictive, and commercial matters are beyond the ambit of the ombudsman (but see n. 118 above). In France, the illegality-fault equation facilitates redress, for instance for unlawful refusal to grant a licence.

(130) In particular, the number of cases brought before the French administrative courts has created long delays in resolving disputes (Brown and Bell, 299). One often comes across proceedings which span decades (e.g. CAA Nancy 18 Mar. 1999, Kurylak, Req 94NC00324: concerning an accident in 1983, where judgment at first instance was given in 1988), and France has been found in breach of Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights for the excessive slowness of its administrative justice system (e.g. Cazenave de la Roche v France [1998] Human Rights Case Digest 620). On a similar point see the domestic case of CE 28 June 2002, Magiera, Req 239575. A translation of this case may be found in the Appendix.

(131) England: n. 116 above; France: n. 66 above.

(132) England: n. 123 above; France: CE 4 Mar. 1977, Guillerot, Req 99413.

(133) England: n. 117 above; France: CE 16 Mar. 1977, SA de Construction Beausite, Req 9764415.

(134) See n. 51 above.

(135) See generally M. Andenas and D. Fairgrieve, ‘Misfeasance in Public Office, Governmental Liability and European Influences’ (2002) 51 ICLQ 757 .

(136) CAA Paris 30 Mar. 1999, El Shikh, AJDA.1999.951.

(137) Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786.

(138) See the text accompanying n. 283 below.

(139) [1987] AC 750 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Hotson’). See generally J. Fleming, ‘Probabilistic Causation in Tort Law’ (1989) 68 Can. Bar Rev. 661 ; C. Foster, ‘A Plea for a Lost Chance: Hotson Reconsidered’ [1995] NLJ 228; T. Hill, ‘A Lost Chance for Compensation in the Tort of Negligence by the House of Lords’ (1991) 54 MLR 511 ; M. Lunney, ‘What Price a Chance’ (1995) 15 LS 1 ; J. Stapleton, ‘The Gist of Negligence, Part II’ (1988) 104 LQR 389 ; M. Stauch, ‘Causation, Risk, and Loss of Chance in Medical Negligence’ (1997) 17 OJLS 205 .

(140) Hotson v Fitzgerald [1987] AC 750.

(141) Hotson [1987] AC 750, 764.

(142) Ibid., 782.

(143) Ibid.

(144) See J. Stapleton, ‘The Gist of Negligence, Part II’ (1988) 104 LQR 389 .

(145) [1995] 1 WLR 1602.

(146) The use of the lost chance doctrine has been explained by some commentators on the basis that the loss depended upon the hypothetical action of a third party: Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 6.10.

(147) Kitchen v Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 WLR 563. This was a case in contract, but P. Cane argues that it applies to tort and contract: Tort Law and Economic Interests (Oxford, 1996), 137 .

(148) Spring v Guardian Assurance [1995] 2 AC 296, 327.

(149) See generally F. Sallet, La Perte de Chance dans la Jurisprudence Administrative relative à la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1994) ; Chapus, para. 1409.

(150) A. Charaf Eldine, ‘La Théorie de la Perte d'une Chance Sanitaire Devant la Cour de Cassation et le Conseil d'Etat’, RTDSS 1983.48.

(151) Ushered in by the CA Grenoble, 24 Oct. 1961, RTDC 1963.326 and CE 24 Apr. 1964, Hôpital-Hospice de Voiron [1964] Rec 259.

(152) Compare the Hotson case and CE 10 Nov. 1976, Rivalland, Req 97760.

(153) CE 27 May 1987, Legoff [1987] Rec 186.

(154) CE 2 Apr. 1990, Garcia, Req 56426.

(155) CE 22 Jan. 1986, Grellier [1986] Rec 643. See also CE 6 Nov. 2000, Gregory, Req 289398.

(156) F. Sallet, La Perte de Chance dans la Jurisprudence Administrative relative à la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1994) 26 .

(157) CE 28 Mar. 1980, Centre Hospitalier de Seclin [1980] Rec 787; CE 10 Jan. 1986, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’ [1986] Rec 712; CAA Bordeaux 16 July 1998, Commune de Villefranche de Rouergue, Req 95BX01813.

(158) For instance, a viticulturist's lost chance of gaining an appellation d'origine contrôlée for wine: CAA Lyon 5 Mar. 1998, Lapalue, Req 97LY02493.

(159) See M. Deguergue, ‘La Perte de Chance en Droit Administratif’ in G. Koubi and G. Guglielmi, L'Egalité des Chances: Analyses Evolutions et Perspectives (Paris, 2000) 1999 .

(160) Chapus, para. 1409; L. Dubouis, ‘Le Juge Administratif, le Malade et le Médecin’ in Mélanges Offerts à Marcel Waline (Paris, 1974), 404 ; J.-P. Taugourdeau, ‘Le Caractère Certain et Direct du Préjudice en Matière de Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’, AJDA 1974.508, 519; I. Poirot-Mazères, ‘La Notion de Préjudice en Droit Administratif Francais’, RDP 1997.519, 549. In English law, the courts require a substantial chance as opposed to a speculative one (Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 1WLR1602) or the loss of a reasonable chance (Spring v Guardian Assurance [1995] 2 AC 296).

(161) CAA Lyon 11 May 1994, Perrin, Req 93LY00528; CAA Bordeaux 30 Dec. 1997, Gachy, Req 95BX01047. CE 3 Nov. 1997, Chavanelle [1997] Rec 888.

(162) CAA Nancy 15 Oct. 1998, Demarecaux, Req 94NC01019.

(163) CE 25 Nov. 1998, Peyrard, Req 181664; CE 16 Nov. 1998, Treptow, Req 178865; CAA Lyon 6 Nov. 1998, Commune de Saint-Martin-Le-Vinoux, Req 93LY01287. Contrary to some commentators' assertions: J.-P. Taugourdeau, ‘Le Caractère Certain et Direct du Préjudice en Matière de Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’, AJDA 1974.508, 524.

(164) CE 13 May 1970, Monti [1970] Rec 322 (10,000 francs). Lost profits based on 1.25% of the cost of the overall project were recovered in CAA Bordeaux 3 Dec. 1991, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’, Req 89BX00875

(165) CE 8 Feb. 1984, Gueninchault, Req 44690 (38 474 F); CE 3 Nov. 1997, Chavanelle [1997] Rec 888 (60,000 FF).

(166) But see CE 24 Jan. 1996, Collins [1996] Rec 14.

(167) See respectively Chap. 4, sect. 3.3, Chap. 5, sect. 2.3.2 and Chap. 8, sect. 5.

(168) See sect. 5.

(169) Ibid.

(170) Deguergue, 407.

(171) Constraints of space prevent an exhaustive exegesis of the doctrinal debate, so arguments of comparative interests are highlighted. See further N. Jansen, ‘The Idea of a Lost Chance’ (1999) 19 OJLS 271 ; C. Muller, La Perte d'une Chance: Etude Comparative en vue de son Indemnisation en Droit Suisse, notamment dans la Responsabilité Médicate (Berne, 2002) ; W. van Gerven, J. Lever, and P. Larouche, Tort Law (Oxford, 2000) 459 .

(172) D.1970 Chronique 123, 124. See also Deguergue, 407.

(173) [1987] AC 750, 793.

(174) F. Sallet, La Perte de Chance dans la Jurisprudence Administrative relative à la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1994) 26 .

(175) J. Stapleton, ‘The Gist of Negligence, Part II’ (1988) 104 LQR 389 . See also F. Cownie, ‘Damages for Loss of a Chance in Tort’ [1989] PN 194; N. Jansen, ‘The Idea of a Lost Chance’ (1999) 19 OJLS 271 .

(176) Stapleton, n. 175 above, 396. See also A. Dorsner-Dolivet, Contribution à la Restauration de la Faute (Paris, 1986) 134 .

(177) See Cass civ 1st 24 Mar. 1981, D.1981 Jurisprudence 545.

(178) See A. Bénabent, La Chance et le Droit (Paris, 1973) para. 237 ; A. Charaf Eldine, ‘La Théorie de la Perte d'une Chance Sanitaire Devant la Cour de Cassation et le Conseil d'Etaf’, RTDSS 1983.48, 65.

(179) e.g. CE 9 July 1975, Grandclément, Req 93206; CE 19 Dec. 1984, Boehrer [1984] Rec 433; CAA Bordeaux 3 Dec. 1991, Société ‘Les Travaux du Midi’, Req 89BX00875.

(180) Explicitly recognized in CAA Paris 9 June 1998, Berkoun, Req 95PA03525.

(181) CAA Nancy 28 Sept. 2000, Kauffmann, Req 96NC03121; CAA Nantes 7 May 1997, Pastor, Req 93NT01144 (medical); CAA Marseille 23 July 1998, Commune de Centuri, Req 96MA02425 (lost chance of career). A decisive turning-point would seem to be: CE 5 Jan. 2000, Telle [2000] Rec 5 (see the discussion of this issue in the conclusions of CG Chauvaux).

(182) See the text accompanying nn. 193 and 304 below.

(183) Human Rights Act 1998, s 8(4).

(184) See more detailed discussion: D. Fairgrieve, ‘The Human Rights Act 1998, Damages and Tort Law’ [2001] PL 695, 711.

(185) See Tinnelly & Sons Ltd v UK; McElduff v UK (1999) 27 EHRR 249 (ECtHR awarded sums of £10,000 and £15,000 for the applicants' lost opportunity to have an adjudication on the merits of their claims before the domestic courts owing to the application of public interest immunity certificates); W v UK (1991) 13 EHRR 453 (lost opportunities were found to stem from violations of Convention rights owing to procedural defects in respect of local authority child protection proceedings and the lack of a judicial remedy).

(186) S. Arrowsmith, The Law of Public and Utilities Procurement (London, 1996) 913 .

(187) Harmon Façades Ltd v The Corporate Officer of the House of Commons (1999) 67 Con LR 1; Harmon CFEM Façades (UK) Ltd v Corporate Officer of the House of Commons (No 2) (2000) 72 Con LR 21.

(188) CAA Nancy 27 May 1999, Chatteleyn, Req 95NC01399.

(189) CE 9 Dec. 1970, Losser [1970] Rec 745.

(190) CE 22 Oct. 1975, Panis [1975] Rec 1247.

(191) CE 5 May 1995, Gallée, Req 80634.

(192) CG Delevalle's conclusions in TA Lille 28 Feb. 1958 D.1958 Jurisprudence 216.

(193) Literally ‘troubles in the conditions of existence’.

(194) R. Chapus, Responsabilité Publique et Responsabilité Privée: les Influences Réciproques des Jurisprudences Administrative et Judiciaire (Paris, 1954) para. 414 . This is similarly expressed in Chapus' textbook at para. 1410.

(195) But this can sometimes cover a victim's loss of earnings as in, e.g., CAA Bordeaux 2 June 1994, Commune de Nieul-sur-Mer-L'Houmeau, Req 92BX00877. See the text accompanying n. 304 below.

(196) CE 6 June 1958, Commune de Grigny [1958] Rec 323.

(197) CE 24 Apr. 1942, Morell [1942] Rec 136; CE 15 June 1949, Dame Durand [1949] Rec 288; CE 12 Oct. 1956, Epoux Fabre [1956] Rec 368.

(198) CE 28 Apr. 1989, Richard, Req 63779.

(199) See further discussion in sect. 5.1 below.

(200) Corresponding to the emotional distress suffered by a person owing to the injury or death of another person, but it can also cover the distress suffered by the injured person him-or herself: see Chapus, para. 1410.

(201) For instance, CE 24 Mar. 1916, Quénot, Sirey 1922.3.54.

(202) CE 17 Feb. 1960, Lefondeur [1960] Rec 116.

(203) A. Coudevylle, ‘Le 〈〈Pretium Affectionis〉〉: un Piège pour le Juge Administratif’, D.1979 Chronique 173, 177. Morange refers to the possible ‘chain reaction’ of litigation (‘Le Préjudice Moral Devant les Tribunaux Administratifs’, D.1948 Chronique 105, 108). See also J. Dupichot, Les Préjudices Réfléchis Nés de la l'Atteinte à la Vie ou à l'Intégrité Corporelle (Paris, 1969) para. 8 .

(204) CG Delevalle's conclusions in TA Lille 28 Feb. 1958, D.1958 Jurisprudence 216, 217. See also M. Laîné, Répertoire Commaille, 15 Jan. 1959, 34.

(205) CG Delevalle's conclusions, n. 204 above.

(206) E. P. Luce, ‘La Question du Préjudice Moral dans la Jurisprudence Administrative’, JCP 1961.1.1645.

(207) From the early nineteenth century: see R. Chapus, Responsabilité Publique et Responsabilité Privée: les Influences Réciproques des Jurisprudences Administrative et Judiciaire (Paris, 1954) para. 417 .

(208) CG Fougère's conclusions in CE 29 Oct. 1954, Bondurand, D.1954 Jurisprudence 767.

(209) Speech of M. Cupfer to the Assembleé Nationale on 28 Dec. 1957, [1957] Journal Officiel, Débats Parlementaires: Assemblée Nationale 5516.

(210) It was suspected that pretium affectionis had been surreptitiously compensated under the head of troubles dans les conditions d'existence: Chapus, n. 207 above, para. 417; A. Coudevylle, ‘Le 〈〈Pretium Affectionis〉〉: un piège pour le Juge Administratif’, D.1979 Chronique 173, 175; J. Waline, RDP 1962. 330, 331; A. de Laubadère, D.1954 Jurisprudence 767, 770. Contra Deguergue, 426.

(211) CE 24 Nov. 1961, Epoux Letisserand [1961] Rec 661.

(212) CAA Lyon 13 Feb. 1997, Centre Hospitaller de Thonon-Les-Bains, Req 94LY00232.

(213) CAA Bordeaux 16 Dec. 1996, Centre Hospitalier Régional de Toulouse, Req 94BX01242.

(214) CAA Paris 24 Mar. 1998, X, Req 96PA02373. But claimants are unlikely to gain damages for douleur morale caused by loss of property: CAA Lyon 22 May 1997, Romeo, Req 94LY01345.

(215) CAA Bordeaux 20 Jan. 1997, Bibard, Req 95BX00728.

(216) CAA Paris 10 Feb. 1998, Voyer, Req 96PA01048 (8,000 FF); CE 13 Nov. 1998, Bavoil, Req 189273 (20,000 FF); CAA Lyon 28 June 1999, Djardem, Req 98LY00254 (10,000 FF); CE 9 July 1997, Perugia, Req 158347 (30,000 FF).

(217) G. Isaac, ‘Après 1'arret Letisserand: Dix ans de Réparation de la Douleur Morale par le Conseil d'Etat’ in Mélanges offerts à Paul Couzinet (Toulouse, 1974) 387 ; C. Harlow, ‘Remedies in French Administrative Law’ [1977] PL 227, 242–5.

(218) Circa 1,500 Euros. CAA Bordeaux 27 Dec. 1990, Valiente [1990] Rec 989 (5,000 FF); CAA Nantes 9 July 1998, Guyon, Req 95NT00537; CAA Nancy 14 June 2001, Cochard, Req 96NC01400 (9,000 FF).

(219) CE 25 Feb. 1972, Pollack, RDP 1972.1558.

(220) Guettier, 136; R. Denoix de Saint Marc and D. Labetoulle, AJDA 1970.351. But Harlow is more circumspect: ‘Remedies in French Administrative Law’ [1977] PL 227, 244.

(221) See, e.g., the increase in the level of damages awarded for pretium affectionis sustained by a widow or widower: CE 4 Nov. 1966, Hoffmann, Req 62265 (2,000 FF); CE 5 Jan. 1977, Montague, Req 90096 (6,000 FF); CE 23 Dec. 1981, Centre Hospitalier de Bayonne, Req 18345 (15,000 FF); CE 24 Jan. 1990, Université de Lille, Req 69947 (30,000 FF).

(222) CE 4 Sept. 1995, Leclerq, Req 85324 (70,000 FF); CAA Nancy 29 Jan. 1998, Kaluska, Req 93NC00137 (60,000 FF); CAA Nancy 1 July 1999, Devillers, Req 95NC01092 (80,000 FF); CAA Nancy 1 July 1999, Devillers, Req 95NC01092 (80,000 FF); CAA Nantes 14 Mar. 2001, Stanislas, Req 99NT00547 (100,000F); CAA Lyon 9 May 2000, O'Hayon, Req 95LY02129 (80,000 FF).

(223) See n. 216 above. See also CAA Lyon 9 May 2000, O'Hayon, Req 95LY02129 (40,000 FF on death of father); CAA Bordeaux 8 Mar. 1999, Janota, Req 96BX00957 (30,000 FF on death of father); TA Montpellier 13 Oct. 1999, Huillet, Req 941502 (20,000 FF on death of father).

(224) Housecroft v Burnett [1986] 1 All ER 332.

(225) See sect. 5.1 below.

(226) Clerk & Lindsell, para. 1–22; Winfield and Jolawicz, para. 5.45. A more liberal approach may prevail in respect of torts actionable per se: see P. Giliker, ‘A “New” Head of Damages: Damages for Mental Distress in the English Law of Torts’ [2000] LS 19.

(227) Hicks v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1992] 2 All ER 65.

(228) Hinz v Berry [1970] 2 QB 40.

(229) See the text accompanying n. 407 below.

(230) White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 1 All ER 1, 32. See Clerk & Lindsell, para. 7–43.

(231) For a comparative law study see M. Janssens, ‘Nervous Shock Liability’ (1998) 6 European Review of Private Law 77 .

(232) McLoughlin v O'Brian [1983] 1 AC 410, 431; Hinz v Berry [1970] 2 QB 40, 42.

(233) Page v Smith [1996] AC 155. See also Young v Charles Church (1997) 39 BMLR 146.

(234) Such as the floodgates concern: Law Commission, Liability for Psychiatric Illness (Law Com No 249, 1998) para. 6.5.

(235) Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310, 403.

(236) Ibid., 397. See J. Stapleton, ‘In Restraint of Tort’ in P. Birks (ed.), Frontiers of Liability (Oxford, 1994) 95 .

(237) Alcock [1992] 1 AC 310, 398. This may also apply to fiancés.

(238) Ibid.

(239) Ibid., 397.

(240) White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1999] 1 All ER 1. The earlier case of Chadwick v British Transport Commission [1967] 2 All ER 945 was re-categorized as a primary victim case.

(241) McLoughlin v O'Brian [1983] 1 AC 410. But see the comments of Lord Slynn in W v Essex CC [2001] 2 AC 592, 601.

(242) Alcock [1992] 1 AC 310.

(243) See Allin v City & Hackney Health Authority [1996] 7 Med. LR 167, and the discussion of the comparative perspective in Markesinis and Deakin, 135. Compare the French law approach: CAA Paris 24 Mar. 1998, X, Req 96PA02373 (30,000 FF damages were awarded to a person who was erroneously informed of his HIV+ status).

(244) Owens v Liverpool Corporation [1939] 1 KB 394.

(245) Attia v British Gas Plc [1988] QB 304. See Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 5.50.

(246) This decision was analysed in detail in Chap. 4, sect. 2.1.2.3.

(247) Phelps v Hillingdon LBC [2001] 2 AC 619, 654 and 664. See Brooke LJ's comments on this in Robinson v St Helens MBC [2002] EWCA Civ. 1099: ‘the House of Lords has now recognised the existence of a legal duty of care concerned with a person's well being where the foreseeable (and recoverable) damage resulting from a breach is not necessarily a physical or recognisable psychiatric injury’ (para. 36).

(248) McFarlane v Wilkinson [1997] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 259, 268.

(249) Racz v Home Office [1994] 2 AC 45.

(250) See respectively Chap. 3, sect. 3.1 and Chap. 4, sect. 2.2.1.

(251) Although it would seem that there are no special restrictions on damages for psychiatric illness under other intentional torts: Wilkinson v Downton [1897] 2 QB 57. For nuisance see St Helen's Smelting Co v Tipping (1865) 11 HLC 642, 650.

(252) See further Chap. 3, sect. 3.3.2.

(253) Ibid.

(254) HRA, s 8(4).

(255) Also referred to by the ECtHR, in civil law terminology, as ‘moral damage’, e.g. Gillow v UK, A124-C (1987).

(256) For further examples see K. Starmer, European Human Rights Law (Legal Action Group, London, 1999) paras. 2.57–2.67 .

(257) Loizidou v Turkey, judgment of 28 July 1998.

(258) Cazenave de la Roche v France [1998] Human Rights Case Digest 620.

(259) H v UK (1991) 13 EHRR 449 (just satisfaction).

(260) Young, James and Webster v UK (1983) 5 EHRR 201.

(261) For instance ‘bouts of depression’: Estima Jorge v Portugal, 1998–II 762, para. 52.

(262) For discussion of this tort see Markesinis and Deakin, at 396–400.

(263) See, e.g., H v UK (1991) 13 EHRR 449 (just satisfaction).

(264) An injury which encompasses the emotional harm caused by the disruption to a relationship: for instance where there has been disruption to a relationship between a parent and child due to human rights violations: H v UK (1991) 13 EHRR 449; O v UK (1991) 13 EHRR 578.

(265) See the more general discussion in D. Fairgrieve, ‘The Human Rights Act 1998, Damages and Tort Law’ [2001] PL 695.

(266) CAA Paris 24 Mar. 1998, X, Req 96PA02373.

(267) In such cases, secondary victims predominantly claim for non-pecuniary loss suffered, but sometimes will claim for financial loss sustained due to injury of the primary victim: CE 17 Jan. 1990, Grandin [1990] Rec 6.

(268) Sect. 6.2.3 below.

(269) See also F.H. Lawson and B. Markesinis, Tortious Liability for Unintentional Harm in the Common Law and the Civil Law (Cambridge, 1982) chap. 2 .

(270) See nn. 216, 222, and 223 above. See also David's comments in relation to civil law: R. David, English Law and French Law: A Comparison in Substance (London, 1980) 166 .

(271) Judicial Studies Board, Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases (5th edn, London, 2000) 10 .

(272) See n. 316 below. See J. Bell, S. Boyron, and S. Whittaker, Principles of French Law (Oxford, 1998) 394 .

(273) For a comparison between the rules in French civil law and those in English law, see G. Viney and B. Markesinis, La Réparation du Dommage Corporel (Paris, 1985) chap. 3 .

(274) R. Denoix de Saint Marc and D. Labetoulle, AJDA 1970.351, 352; CG Morisot's conclusions in CE 16 Mar. 1977, Doucakis [1977] Rec 968. But an amount for the physical injury per se may well be included in the notion of troubles dans les conditions d'existence: CE 26 June 1989, Olearain [1989] Rec 936.

(275) Forster v Pugh [1955] CLY 741.

(276) See generally Winfield and Jolowicz, paras. 22.18-22.38.

(277) England: see the general discussion in Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Medical, Nursing and other Expenses; Collateral Benefits (Law Com No 262,1999). France: CE 20 May 1982, Paluszak, Req 30467.

(278) Lim Poh Choo v Camden & Islington HA [1980] AC 174, 191–2.

(279) P. Cane, Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th edn, London, 1999) 108 . For the possibility of making structured settlements see Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 22.23.

(280) Evidently, claims may also be brought for past financial loss caused by the injury e.g. whilst in hospital.

(281) But including work-related benefits such as profits: Lee v Sheard [1956] 1 QB 192.

(282) Johnston v GWR [1904] 2 KB 250; Ratnasingham v Kow Ah Dek [1983] 1 WLR 1235.

(283) On the assumption that the claimant will invest the lump sum in index-linked government stock rather than equities: Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345. Note that in June 2001 the Lord Chancellor exercised his power under s 1 of the Damages Act 1996 to prescribe the discount rate to be used in personal injury claims in England and Wales at 2.5% (previously the rate generally used by the courts was 3%). See further R. Hogg, ‘Multipliers—the Discount Rate’ [2002] JPIL 46. Savings made by an injured person as a result of being maintained at public expense in hospital are set off against any income lost as a result of injuries: Administration of Justice Act 1982, s 5.

(284) Damages awards in the form of index-linked annuities are awarded to children: CAA Nancy 13 June 1996, Jacaton, Req 95NC00001.

(285) Determined on the basis of figures from the Caisse Nationale de Prévoyance.

(286) B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédie de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique, (Paris, 1988) para. 111 .

(287) CE 27 Mar. 1985, Sarasin, Req 46577; CAA Lyon 19 July 1990, Erba, Req 89LY00070.

(288) CAA Nantes 30 Apr. 1992, Centre Hospitalier Régional de Tours, Req 90NT00471; CAA Paris 23 Sept. 1997, Dupont, Req 94PA01637; CAA Nantes 10 Feb. 1994, Alix [1994] Rec 616 (upheld in CE 23 Apr. 1997, Alix, [1997] Rec 167).

(289) CAA Nancy 30 June 1994, Stimpfling, Req 92NC00924. See for another case of reduction in future salary CE 10 Nov. 1976, Rivalland, Req 97760.

(290) CE 4 Apr. 1996, Novello, Req 93NC01175.

(291) CAA Bordeaux 17 Oct. 1994, Froment, Req 93BX01052 (300,000 FF for the lost chance of becoming a qualified electrician); CAA Bordeaux 2 June 1994, Commune de Nieul-sur-Mer-L'Houmeau, Req 92BX00877 (500,000 FF for the inability to continue oyster-farming).

(292) CAA Bordeaux 30 Dec. 1993, Commune de Lodeve, Req 92BX01233; CAA Nancy 4 May 1999, Merly, Req 95NC00066. See also CAA Paris 19 July 1994, X, Req 93PA00586 (dependency loss).

(293) Phelan v East Cumbria Health Authority [1991] 3 Med LR 419.

(294) Housecroft v Burnett [1986] 1 All ER 332.

(295) Baggaley v McEntire [1974] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 528.

(296) Administration of Justice Act 1982, s 1(1)(b).

(297) Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairs Ltd [1984] QB 405.

(298) Moeliker v Reyrolle & Co Ltd [1977] 1 All ER 9 (fishing).

(299) Cook v Kier [1970] 1 WLR 774.

(300) Judicial Studies Board, Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases (5th edn, London, 2000) .

(301) See sect. 4.1 above.

(302) CE 22 Mar. 1978, Ricot, RDP 1978.1753; CE 9 Oct. 1981, Gaz de France, Req 14471.

(303) CAA Nancy 13 June 1996, Jacaton, 95NC00001; CAA Lyon 13 May 1998, Centre Hospitalier de Semur-en-Auxois, Req 95LY21243.

(304) See, e.g., R. Chapelard, ‘Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans la Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’ (Thesis, L'Université de Grenoble, 1981) 51.

(305) See the text accompanying n. 290 above.

(306) CAA Lyon 11 May 1994, Perrin, Req 93LY00528; CE 17 May 2000, Centre Hospitalier Regional de Montpellier, Req 165162.

(307) which is sometimes referred to under the civil law label of ‘préjudice d'agrément’: CAA Nantes 2 May 2001, Benoiton, Req 96NT02241; CE 21 Feb. 1979, Dupuis [1979] Rec 876.

(308) CAA Lyon 10 Oct. 2000, Locatelli, Req 96LY00184; CAA Lyon 24 Oct. 2000, Crevenat, Req 96LY001308; CE 22 Apr. 1992, Poste, Req 77330.

(309) CAA Nancy 18 Mar. 1999, Kurylak, Req 94NC00324;.

(310) CE 14 Feb. 1975, Société Eaux de Marseille [1975] Rec 124.

(311) ‘Partial Permanent Disability.’ For French civil Law see W. Pfennigstorf (ed.), Personal Injury Compensation: A Comparative Analysis of the Major European Jurisdictions (London, 1993) 39–40 .

(312) CAA Lyon 21 July 1995, Guidicelli, Req 93LY01141.

(313) Despite the fact that this injury is described as ‘partial’. See CE 4 Mar. 1988, Pierdet [1988] Rec 1019.

(314) Unlike in English law, where the relatives of the primary victim do not generally have a right in action against the wrongdoer for the loss they have sustained as a result of the injury of the primary victim: see G. Viney and B. Markesinis, La Réparation du Dommage Corporel (Paris, 1985) para. 68 .

(315) CAA Bordeaux 15 Feb. 1999, Cauhape, Req 96BX01460. See sect. 4 above.

(316) CAA Nantes 10 Feb. 1994, Alix [1994] Rec 616 (upheld in CE 23 Apr. 1997, Alix [1997] Rec 167).

(317) Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Non-Pecuniary Loss (Law Cmn No 257, 1999) para. 3.88.

(318) Various external factors in the two countries can influence comparisons, such as changing currency rates and differences in purchasing power. Moreover, no two cases are truly identical, though this problem has been addressed by relying on generalized guideline figures for English law, and taking a variety of different cases in French law, cross-referenced with internal judicial documentation on damages.

(319) Figures are given in the currency in use when judgment was handed down (i.e. French Francs rather than Euros). The figures are drawn from specific French cases, but the quantum of damages has been cross-referenced, and verified, where possible with the various internal Conseil d'Etat documents concerning the method of calculating damages.

(320) Guideline figures given by the Judicial Studies Board, Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases (5th edn, London, 2000) . These take account of the recent increase in the level of damages for non-pecuniary loss resulting from the CA decision in Heil v Rankin [2001] QB 272. Responding to the Law Commission's recommendations in Damages for Personal Injury: Non-Pecuniary Loss (Law Com No 257), the CA held that in the case of the most serious injuries, damages awards for non-pecuniary loss will be increased by one third. Below that level, the increase in damages will be tapered, but there will be no increase in damages awards which are at present less than £10,000. See generally P. Havers, ‘General Damages Raised by up to One Third’, [2000] JPIL 123; C. Bennett ‘Personal Injuries’ [2000] JPIL 129.

(321) Involving partial amputation.

(322) CAA Lyon 17 July 1998, Noèl Versini Bullara, Req 95LY01454.

(323) CAA Paris 26 Jan. 1999, Appaganou, Req 96PA00263; CAA Lyon 17 Sept. 1998, Caisse Primaire d'Assurance Maladie de Privas, Req 97LY01479.

(324) TA Montpellier 24 June 1992, Maury, Req 9719552; CAA Lyon 16 Feb. 1989, Centre Hospitalier La Ciotat, Req 89LY00311.

(325) CAA Douai 12 Dec. 2000, Lambre, Req 97DA11134; CAA Paris 26 Feb. 1998, Klestinec, Req 96PA01000; CAA Paris 11 July 1997, Fabre, Req 97PA02206; CAA Paris 29 Dec. 1992, Tefau, Req 89PA02791.

(326) This range covers both above-knee and below-knee amputation of one leg.

(327) CE 17 May 2000, Centre Hospitalier Régional de Montpellier, Req 165162; CAA Paris 23 Sept. 1997, Dupont, Req 94PA01637.

(328) CAA Nancy 5 Mar. 1996, Toret, Req 93NC01006.

(329) CAA Nancy 26 Feb. 1998, Lejeune, Req 90NC00473; CAA Nantes 10 Feb. 1994, Alix [1994] Rec 616 (upheld in CE 23 Apr. 1997, Alix [1997] Rec 167).

(330) CAA Paris 13 July 1995, Guerpillon, Req 93PA00784; CE 10 Feb. 1995, Sicret [1995] Rec 1034.

(331) e.g. CAA Nantes 30 Apr. 1992, Centre Hospitalier Régional de Tours, Req 90NT00471. This attitude was confirmed in an interview with a lawyer at the Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris.

(332) CE 23 Apr. 1997, Alix [1997] Rec 167.

(333) CE 10 Apr. 1992, Epoux V [1992] Rec 171; CAA Paris 23 Sept. 1997, Dupont, Req 94PA01637; CAA Lyon 9 May 2000, O'Hayon, Req 95LY02129; CAA Lyon 20 Mar. 2001, Jacquet, Req 96LY00922; CE 5 Jan. 2000, Telle [2000] Rec 5.

(334) CE 6 Apr. 1979, Ministre des Postes et Telecommunications [1979] Rec 154; CAA Nantes 26 July 1991, Vivien, Req 89NT00992. See also CG Latournerie's conclusions in CE 13 May 1977, Marie, D.1978 Jurisprudence 478. There are however some tentative indications of a more liberal attitude emanating from the Cours Administratives d'Appel, e.g. CAA Nancy 26 Feb. 1998, Lejeune, Req 90NC00473.

(335) See the text accompanying n. 291 above.

(336) See Clerk & Lindsell, para. 27–07.

(337) Barry v British Transport Commission [1954] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 372.

(338) eg Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345. See D McIntosh and M. Holmes, Personal Injury Awards in EU and ETTA Countries (London, 1994) .

(339) P. Cane, Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th edn, London, 1999) 124 .

(340) No damages were awarded under the head of lost earnings for the unemployed or for housewives in CE 26 July 1985, Bernabe, Req 40112; CE 6 Feb. 1981, Capet, Req 5859; CE 6 May 1985, Degeorges, Req 38876.

(341) CAA Paris 27 Jan. 1998, Caisse Primaire d'Assurance Maladie, Req 95PA01218.

(342) Daly v General Steam Navigation Co Ltd [1980] 3 All ER 696.

(343) Croke v Wiseman [1981] 3 All ER 852; Joyce v Yeoman [1981] 2 All ER 21.

(344) CE 17 June 1987, Parisy, Req 70793.

(345) Including the risk of the victim being at a disadvantage in getting an equally paid job should he or she lose his or her present job in the future: Smith v Manchester Corporation (1974) 17 KIR 1.

(346) CE 23 Apr. 1997, Alix [1997] Rec 167.

(347) Compare two cases of housewives losing the use of an arm: Daly v General Steam Navigation Co Ltd [1980] 3 All ER 696, where £21,116 was awarded; CE 3 Nov. 1982, Martins, Req 6403, where 7,500 FF was awarded for a similar injury.

(348) The topic of collateral benefits in death is covered under the section on claims for wrongful death: see the text accompanying n. 445 below.

(349) Chapus, para. 1429.

(350) Ibid.

(351) See generally Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Collateral Benefits (Law Cmn Consultation Paper 147, 1997); Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Medical, Nursing and other Expenses; Collateral Benefits (Law Com No 262, 1999).

(352) For the position in French civil law see Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Collateral Benefits (Law Cmn Consultation Paper 147, 1997) paras. 3.36–3.45.

(353) Charity: Cunningham v Harrison [1973] QB 942. Pensions: Parry v Cleaver [1970] AC 1; Smoker v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority [1991] 2 AC 502 (but note that where a disability pension takes the form of a lump sum, that part of the sum which represents payments which the claimant would have received after retirement is deducted from the damages: Longden v British Coal Corporation [1998] AC 653).

(354) Pension: CAA Lyon 17 Sept. 1998, Caisse Primaire d'Assurance Maladie de Privas, Req 97LY01479; CAA Lyon 5 Mar. 1998, El Basli, Req 96LY01534. Charity: CE 12 July 1950, Ducros [1950] Rec 436. See also CE 3 Apr. 1987, Martelly, Req 62185 (concerning property damage).

(355) English law: Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997. French Law: see Art. L 376–1 and Art. L 454–1 Code de la Sécurité Sociale.

(356) English law: Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997, Wadey v Surrey County Council [1999] 2 All ER 334. French Law: see Art. L 376–1 and Art. L 454–1 Code de la Sécurité Sociale, CE 20 Mar. 1991, Bouvard [1971] Rec 97.

(357) Note that in the English system deductions are made for social security benefits received by the claimant in a period of five years after the date of the injury: P. Cane, Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th edn, London, 1999) 327 . Additionally, in the English scheme, state payment of benefits can be recouped only from damages awarded for corresponding heads of loss e.g. income support only recouped from past lost earnings compensation.

(358) See Art. L 376–1 and Art. L 454–1 Code de la Sécurité Sociale.

(359) Namely the portion of damages for troubles dans les conditions d'existence which is attributable to the loss of ‘physical integrity’: CE 26 June 1989, Olearain [1989] Rec 936. See B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ (1999) in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédie de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1988) para. 149 .

(360) See Art. L 376–1 and Art. L 454–1 Code de la Sécurité Sociale.

(361) Road Traffic (NHS Charges) Act 1999. See analysis of NHS recoupment in Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Medical, Nursing and other Expenses (Law Cmn Consultation Paper 144, 1996) paras. 3.19–3.42; Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Medical, Nursing and other Expenses; Collateral Benefits (Law Com No 262, 1999) paras. 3.19–3.42. See C. Lewis, ‘Recovery of NHS Accident Costs’ (1999) 62 MLR 903.

(362) CE 14 Mar. 1986, Foletti [1986] Rec 71.

(363) Hodgson v Trapp [1989] AC 807, 819–20.

(364) For discussion of this see in England: C. Mitchell, The Law of Subrogation (Oxford, 1994) 67 ; France: Chapus, para. 1429.

(365) P. Cane, Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law (6th edn, London, 1999) 329, n. 4 .

(366) Law Commission, Damages for Personal Injury: Collateral Benefits (Law Cmn Consultation Paper 147, 1997) para. 5.17.

(367) See Chap. 6. In both England and France, the recoupment of welfare and health costs occurs in full regardless of the fact that the compensation payment may be reduced for the contributory negligence of the victim. France: Art. L 376–1 and Art. L 454–1 Code de la Sécurité Sociale; B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ (1999) in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédie de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1988) para. 147 ; Y. Lambert-Faivre, Droit du Dommage Corporel: Systèmes d'Indemnisation (3rd edn, Paris, 1996) para. 451 . England: Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 22.34.

(368) See, e.g., CE 3 Feb. 1984, Loubat [1984] Rec 46; CE 20 Nov. 1981, Cailleau [1981] Rec 913; CE 26 June 1989, Olearain [1989] Rec 936; CAA Paris 25 Apr. 1996, Verstraete, Req 94PA02004; CE 7 Nov. 1986, Ville de La Rochelle, RDP 1987.471.

(369) CAA Nancy 18 Mar. 1999, Kurylak, Req 94NC00324.

(370) CE 1 June 1973, Gougéon [1973] Rec 1112. The principle did not apply to pecuniary loss: CE 8 Nov. 1968, Commune de Mounes-Prohencoux, Req 68823.

(371) CE 29 Mar. 2000, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, RFDA 2000.850.

(372) Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, s 1. But there are no damages for pre-death trauma: Hicks v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 All ER 690. See also the exception for the tort of defamation: Markesinis and Deakin, 768.

(373) See, e.g., J. Dupichot, Les Préjudices Réfléchis Nés de la l'Atteinte à la Vie ou à l'Intégrité Corporelle (Paris, 1969) .

(374) See the text accompanying n. 316 above for actions arising from the injury to the primary victim.

(375) CE 11 May 1928, Dame Rucheton, Sirey 1928.3.97. See I. Poirot-Mazères, ‘La Notion de Préjudice en Droit Administratif Francais’, RDP 1997.519, 558.

(376) Deguergue, 416.

(377) CE 11 May 1928, Dame Rucheton, Sirey 1928.3.97

(378) CE 7 Dec. 1938, Brassy [1938] Rec 920.

(379) See F.H. Lawson and B. Markesinis, Tortious Liability for Unintentional Harm in the Common Law and the Civil Law (Cambridge, 1982) 68–9 .

(380) J. Dupichot, Les Préjudices Réfléchis Nés de la l'Atteinte à la Vie ou à l'Intégrité Corporelle (Paris, 1969) para. 104 .

(381) M. Hauriou, Sirey 1928.3.97.

(382) See also Deguergue, 416.

(383) J. Dupichot, Les Préjudices Réfléchis Nés de la l'Atteinte à la Vie ou à l'Intégrité Corporelle (Paris, 1969) para. 7 .

(384) CE 25 Jan. 1952, Simon [1952] Rec 60.

(385) CE 25 Jan. 1952, Lassale-Barrère [1952] Rec 60.

(386) Cohabiting unmarried partner.

(387) CE 21 Oct. 1955, Braud [1955] Rec 495.

(388) M. Waline, RDP 1961.1068, 1073.

(389) Cass Civ 1st 16 Jan. 1962, JCP 1962.II.12557.

(390) CE 3 Mar. 1978, Muesser [1978] JCP 1978.II.18986, strongly influenced by CG Dondoux's conclusions in the case.

(391) But the administrative courts still have not caught up with the civil and criminal courts: I. Poirot-Mazères, ‘La Notion de Préjudice en Droit Administratif Francais’ RDP 1997.519, 564. See K. Zweigert and H. Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd edn, Oxford, 1998) 618–19 .

(392) CAA Paris 21 Jan. 1992, Centre Hospitalier Général de Meaux [1992] Rec 1306. See Zweigert and Kötz, n. 391 above, 619.

(393) CE 21 May 1947, Sèvre [1947] Rec 214 (the action was rejected when a businessman claimed loss after an accident to his business partner). There was a similar solution in English law: Malyon v Plummer [1964] 1 QB 330.

(394) CE 14 Apr. 1982, Pacari [1982] Rec 747; CE 26 Feb. 1986, Martin [1986] Rec 719.

(395) Including a stepfather of the deceased suing for douleur morale: CE 9 Dec. 1970, Losser [1970] Rec 745.

(396) CE 26 Jan. 1977, IGN, RDP 1977.1077.

(397) CE 7 Nov. 1975, Guidarini [1975] Rec 559. Note that there is a downwards pressure on the figure taken for annual revenue, as this is limited to the salary declared to the tax authorities, as an incentive against tax fraud: Art. L 122, Livre des Procédures Fiscales.

(398) B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ (1999) in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédie de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1988) para. 184 . There are some indications of a more generous approach: CE 2 Mar. 1988, Commune de La Ciotat, RDP 1989.564.

(399) See CG Morisot's conclusions in CE 25 Sept. 1970, Tesson, D.1971 Jurisprudence 55, 59.

(400) CE 14 Dec. 1988, Commune de Catillon [1988] Rec 1001; CE 22 Mar. 1993, Fraboul [1993] Rec 79.

(401) CAA Paris 23 Sept. 1997, Centre Hospitalier de Lagny, Req 95PA01365. See CE 25 Sept. 1970, Tesson [1970] Rec 540 and the explanation given in CG Morisot's conclusions (D.1971 Jurisprudence 55); and CG Aubin's conclusions in CE 24 Mar. 1976, Thiemard (unpublished).

(402) G. Morange, ‘L'Evaluation du Préjudice par les Juridictions Administrative’, D.1951 Chronique 61; H. Detton, ‘L'Evaluation des Indemnités’, EDCE 1953.52.

(403) Paillet, para. 498.

(404) CE 21 Mar. 1947, Aubry [1947] Rec 123.

(405) When no reassessment for inflation will be made: CE 9 Oct. 1981, Gaz de France, Req 14471. Given the extraordinary delays in the administrative judicial system (n. 130 above) this significantly discourages appeals on the issue of quantum.

(406) Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1(1).

(407) Ibid., s 1A (inserted by the Administration of Justice Act 1982 and amended by Statutory Instrument 2002/644). Where both parents claim, the sum is divided equally between them: Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1A(4).

(408) See n. 390 above.

(409) Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1(3)(b) as amended by the Administration of Justice Act 1982. Prior to this, the child of the deceased could claim for loss of support even if his or her parents were unmarried: K v JMP Co Ltd [1975] QB 85.

(410) Such claims are subject to certain conditions: see Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1(3)(b). These are probably more stringent than the requirement of a ‘sufficiently stable and continuous’ relationship as stipulated in French administrative law (see n. 390 above).

(411) Even an unborn child conceived before the death qualifies if born alive: Lindley v Sharp (1974) 4 Fam 90.

(412) Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 1(3).

(413) Franklin v South Eastern Railway Co (1858) 3 H&N 211.

(414) Berry v Humm [1915] 1 KB 627; Regan v Williamson [1976] 2 All ER 241.

(415) Hay v Hughes [1975] QB 790.

(416) Taff Vale Railway Co v Jenkins [1913] AC 1; Wathen v Vernon [1970] RTR 471. Damages awarded for the reasonable prospect that a child would provide financial assistance to parents are difficult to evaluate, but nonetheless may be substantial: Kandalla v British Airways Board [1981] QB 158.

(417) Davies v Taylor [1974] AC 207.

(418) See further Clerk & Lindsell, paras. 27.47–27.50.

(419) e.g. Brennan v Gale [1949] NI 178.

(420) Harris v Empress Motors Ltd [1983] 3 All ER 561, 565. See Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 23.14.

(421) It may also be reduced where the dependant is in poor health: Corbett v Barking [1991] 2 QB 408.

(422) Graham v Dodds [1983] 1 WLR 808.

(423) Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345.

(424) Cookson v Knowles [1979] AC 556.

(425) But using as a multiplier a figure equivalent to the period of dependency as estimated at the date of death, less the period which has already elapsed between the death and the trial.

(426) Young v Percival [1975] 1 WLR 17; Hodgson v Trapp [1989] AC 807.

(427) Fatal Accidents Act 1976, s 4.

(428) Stanley v Saddique [1992] QB 1. Note also that reg. 2(2)(a) of the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Regulations 1997 expressly excludes payments under the Fatal Accidents Act from the social security recoupment scheme (described in sect. 5.2.2 above).

(429) See n. 222 above.

(430) In French law, there is not a limited list of those who can sue for dependency loss. In practice, however, the categories of those who sue for loss in English and French law are very similar: see the text accompanying nn. 391 and 410 above.

(431) See also the recent French case where it was held that as both spouses worked and the surviving partner earned more, there was no lost revenue: CAA Nancy 12 May 1999, Centre Hospitaller de Montdidier, Req 95NC00230.

(432) 66% in English law, in contrast to 50% in French law.

(433) CE 2 Mar. 1988, Commune de La Ciotat, RDP 1989.564.

(434) CE 8 Nov. 1985, Rijlaarsdam [1985] Rec 775. This figure might be greater for a larger family: CE 25 Sept. 1970, Tesson [1970] Rec 540.

(435) Although the standard fraction in English law may vary: Winfield and Jolowicz, para. 23.14.

(436) See n. 414 above.

(437) CAA Nancy 1 July 1999, Devillers, Req 95NC01092.

(438) B. Stirn, ‘Evaluation du Préjudice’ (1999) in F. Gazier and R. Drago (eds.), Dalloz Encyclopédie de Droit Public: Répertoire de la Responsabilité de la Puissance Publique (Paris, 1988) para. 183 .

(439) Although some limited recognition may be made under the head of troubles dans les conditions d'existence. CE 31 Mar. 1971, Bailleul [1971] Rec 265 (70,000 Francs).

(440) See n. 413 above.

(441) See CAA Bordeaux 14 Nov. 1994, Departement de Dordogne, Req 92BX01039.

(442) See n. 398 above.

(443) Pidduck v Eastern Scottish Omnibuses Ltd [1990] 1 WLR 993.

(444) See sect. 5.2.2.

(445) See, e.g., CAA Bordeaux 18 Nov. 1993, Gaudy, Req 92BX00693.

(446) CAA Bordeaux 18 Nov. 1993, Gaudy, Req 92BX00693; CAA Paris 1 Aug. 1995, Dupouy, Req 93BX01209; CAA Paris 23 Sept. 1997, Centre Hospitaller de Lagny, Req 95PA01365; CE 4 Sept. 1995, Leclerq, Req 85324; CAA Nantes 25 Jan. 1995, Leroux, Req 92NT00651.

(447) CE 2 Mar. 1988, Commune de La Ciotat, RDP 1989.564; CAA Nancy 29 Jan. 1998, Kaluska, Req 93NC00137.

(448) D. McIntosh and M. Holmes, Personal Injury Awards in EU and EFTA Countries (London, 1994) 137–68 . For instance, in Gallagher v Roland Stanley Morris (QBD, 20 Nov. 2001) the claimant's husband, who was a successful businessman, was killed in a road accident when a lorry crashed into the taxi that he was travelling in. The victim left behind a wife and two children. The claimant obtained £2,000,000 damages.

(449) Thatcher v Littlejohn [1978] RTR 369.

(450) Where the property is not irreplaceable and the cost of repair is much greater than the loss in value, the latter will be awarded: Darbishire v Warran [1963] 3 All ER 310.

(451) Dodd Properties v Canterbury CC [1980] 1 WLR 433.

(452) Moore v DER Ltd [1971] 1 WLR 1476.

(453) Liesbosch Dredger v SS Edison [1933] AC 449.

(454) CE 21 Dec. 1990, Megevand, Req 79924.

(455) CE 6 Jan. 1989, Guerrault [1989] Rec 1.

(456) CAA Lyon 25 Feb. 1991, Gaz de France, Req 89LY00427.

(457) L.-M. Boucraut, La Réparation des Atteintes aux Biens dans le Contentieux des Responsabilités Civile et Administrative (Paris, 1993) para. 79 .

(458) CE 4 Mar. 1970, Dulac [1970] Rec 161; CE 8 Dec. 1971, Société des Etablissements Pernod [1971] Rec 753.

(459) CAA Bordeaux 9 May 1990, Najac, Req 89BX00357; CE 27 Nov. 1974, Amouzegh [1974] Rec 595.

(460) See n. 130 above.

(461) CE 3 July 1987, Lutz, Req 42530. See Dodd Properties v Canterbury CC [1980] 1 WLR 433 (£11,000 for repairs at the time of the tort, £30,000 at the time of the hearing).

(462) See J. Moreau, ‘L'Indemnisation et L'Evaluation par le Juge Administratif des Dommages Causés aux Immeubles et aux Meubles’ in Mélanges Chapus (Paris, 1992) 450–1 .

(463) This is a complex area of the law, and whether such a reduction takes place depends upon a number of factors, such as the type of chattel or building concerned and the use for which is was applied. See L.-M. Boucraut, La Réparation des Atteintes aux Biens dans le Contentieux des Responsabilités Civile et Administrative (Paris, 1993) para. 65 .

(464) CE 22 June 1987, Jacques-Boulon [1987] Rec 224 (1/3 reduction).

(465) See CE 3 Jan. 1975, Martin, Req 87585. See Moreau, n. 462 above, 447.

(466) Bacon v Cooper Ltd [1982] 1 All ER 397; Hollebone v Midhurst [1968] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 38.

(467) CE 15 Oct. 1975, Gaillou [1975] Rec 1266.

(468) J. Moreau ‘L'Indemnisation et L'Evaluation par le Juge Administratif des Dommages Causés aux Immeubles et aux Meubles’ in Mélanges Chapus (Paris, 1992) 451 .

(469) CE 10 Apr. 1974, Ville de Cannes [1974] Rec 226. For further discussion see Chap. 6, sect. 3.1.2.

(470) CE 8 Feb. 1980, Commune de Venelles [1980] Rec 923. See R. Chapelard, ‘Le Préjudice Indemnisable dans la Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’ (Thesis, L'Université de Grenoble, 1981) 179.

(471) CE 3 Dec. 1975, Placide [1975] Rec 1264. Note that in some cases damages awards have been reduced when the claimant has received insurance moneys and the insurer had no subrogation right: CE 26 Feb. 1986, Martin, Rec 719.

(472) J.-P. Taugourdeau, ‘Le Caractère Certain et Direct du Préjudice en Matière de Responsabilité Extra-Contractuelle de la Puissance Publique’, AJDA 1974.508, 520–1.

(473) In relation to claims for economic loss (see the text accompanying n. 46 above) and psychiatric harm (n. 234 above).

(474) The text accompanying n. 382 above.

(475) The text accompanying n. 203 above.

(476) The text accompanying nn. 24 and 403 above.

(477) The text accompanying nn. 89 and 163 above. Note that in US law in the past, some types of loss had to be proved with certainty, and that this played ‘a vigorous role in restricting damages’: A. Burrows, Remedies for Torts and Breach of Contract (2nd edn, London, 1994) 33 .

(478) The text accompanying nn. 107, 316, and 393 above.

(479) The text accompanying nn. 92, 165, and 216 above.

(480) The text accompanying n. 97 above. See also sects. 5.2.1 and 6.2.3 above.

(481) See sects. 5.2 and 6.2.3 above. Note also that the relative parsimony of administrative law courts as compared with the ordinary courts (see n. 21 above) is still apparent today—albeit to a lesser extent—as confirmed in interviews with a number of leading practitioners.

(482) See sect. 5.2.2 above.

(483) See n. 130 above.

(484) It is very difficult to obtain statistics on this topic in France. But many cases indicate that reliance is placed on the social welfare system: see, e.g., the fact that in many cases it is implicit that welfare payments offset losses (see n. 292 above). In Crochemore (CAA Nantes, 4 Nov. 1999, JCP 2001.II.10466) the state was found 20% liable for the sinking of a ship and subsequent death of 16 sailors as it had failed in its role in supervising the seaworthiness of the vessel and was thus held liable to pay damages for the moral and financial loss sustained by the sailors' families of only 1,000 FF each!

Copyright © 2015. All rights reserved.

• Privacy policy and legal notice

• Credits

• Log out

Access brought to you by: Higher School of Economics