|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> S & Ors v Chapman & Anor  EWCA Civ 800 (20 May 2008)
Cite as:  EWCA Civ 800
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE SEYMOUR QC)
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE SEDLEY
LORD JUSTICE RIMER
| S & ORS
|- and -
CHAPMAN & ANR
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr Clive Lewis QC and Mr G Clarke (instructed by Messrs Berryman Lace Mawer) appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Ward:
"Sensory and emotional hypersensitivity [which] are liable to make [autistic individuals'] tolerance of all kinds of stimulation low. They may be compulsive, obsessive and prone to acute anxiety attacks, sometimes sinking inwards into calming routines and at other times lashing out furiously."
This family has suffered from W's frenzied attacks and he has himself suffered from the harm he has inflicted on himself.
The application to strike out
The proceedings before the Master.
The appeal to the High Court.
Permission to appeal to this court.
The hearing before us.
The human rights claim.
"(5) Proceedings under subsection (1)(a) must be brought before the end of --
(a) the period of one year beginning with the date on which the act complained of took place; or
(b) such longer period as the court or tribunal considers equitable having regard to all the circumstances,
but that is subject to any rule imposing a stricter time limit in relation to the procedure in question."
"…for want of even minimally suitable provision for his education, he was shut out of the state system for 18 or 19 months. The consequences are said to have amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment and an unjustified disruption of his private and family life, as well as to discrimination in the enjoyment of the A2P1 right [the right that is conferred by Article 2 of the first protocol]."
"I do not consider that it was possible to spell out of this unhappy interlude, with its undoubtedly adverse consequences for both A and his parents, either a failure of the education system or a denial of access to it."
"…there is no plea in the amended particulars of claim of any details of personal injury suffered by [W] fit to give rise to a serious issue which could be tried at trial, on his behalf, as to whether he has suffered personal injuries or not."
"Extreme anxiety and distress; extreme stress and depression; physical injuries resulting from constraint measures being adopted him by third parties; humiliation and loss of dignity. Full particulars of [W's] injuries will be provided in due course pursuant to disclosure and exchange of expert evidence."
"4.1 The particulars of claim must contain:
(1) the claimant's date of birth, and
(2) brief details of the claimant's personal injuries.
4.2 The claimant must attach to his particulars of claim a schedule of details of any past and future
expenses and losses which he claims.
4.3 Where the claimant is relying on the evidence of a medical practitioner the claimant must
attach to or serve with his particulars of claim a report from a medical practitioner about the
personal injuries which he alleges in his claim."
"Instead of introducing [W] to a settled routine the School failed to ensure that his timetable was finalised until several weeks after the start of the term. Constant changes to the… timetable occurred as a result, which impacted adversely on [W]'s behaviour…"
Lifting the stay
"Further, the first Claimant accepts that the claimants had not paid so much as £1 of the £7,000 in costs awarded to the Defendants in June last, nor is he prepared to give any justification for that.
Taking that fact with the approach adopted by the Claimants' side to their allegations as a whole, there is reason to doubt the bone fides of this action.
The action will accordingly be stayed pending further order, with liberty to apply."
"I have said more than once that this is a very, very sad case. Not the least sad aspect of it is that it is plain to me, having listened to Mr [S] make his applications over a day and a half, that he has become very, very, very closely involved in grievances which he considers he and his family have against all of the defendants. He has, I regret to say, become so intimately involved in the claims that he does not have that dispassionate and objective approach to assessing what claims can properly be pursued on behalf of his son and what not, that a litigation friend needs to have in order that the litigation friend can fairly and competently conduct the proceedings on behalf of his son. In those circumstances it would not be appropriate to exceed to the application that Mr [S] should be substituted for Mrs [S] as the litigation friend of their son, W, and so I refuse that application."
Lord Justice Sedley:
Lord Justice Rimer:
Order: Appeal dismissed