Holtby v Brigham Cowan (Hull) Ltd [2000] 3 All ER 421

Facts

  • Mr. Holtby, the claimant, was employed as a marine fitter by several employers between 1953 and 1979, during which he was exposed to asbestos dust.
  • As a result of prolonged exposure, Holtby developed asbestosis.
  • Brigham Cowan (Hull) Ltd was among the claimant’s employers within this period.
  • Holtby claimed that Brigham Cowan (Hull) Ltd’s failure to provide adequate protection amounted to negligence causing his illness.
  • The trial judge found the defendant liable but limited responsibility to the period of their direct employment, apportioning damages accordingly.
  • The claimant appealed, arguing that the defendant should be liable for all his damages, claiming it was impossible to differentiate the harm caused by each employer.

Issues

  1. Whether a defendant employer can be held liable for the entirety of damages where an injury arose from exposure over time with multiple employers.
  2. Whether damages for divisible injuries should be apportioned according to each defendant’s contribution to the harm.
  3. Whether causation and proportionality require limiting liability to only the portion of harm attributable to each defendant.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal, upholding the apportionment of damages.
  • The court held that the claimant bears the burden of proving causation.
  • Where an injury is divisible, such as asbestosis caused by cumulative exposures, damages may be apportioned to reflect the extent of each defendant’s contribution.
  • The defendant’s liability was limited to the proportion of harm directly attributable to their period of employment, not for exposures during periods with other employers.
  • The court rejected the argument that the defendant should be liable for the totality of damages in cases where precise apportionment is challenging.
  • This approach was supported as consistent with causation and proportionality in negligence.

Legal Principles

  • In negligence claims involving multiple tortfeasors and divisible injuries, liability is limited to the extent each defendant contributed to the harm.
  • The doctrine of causation requires that a defendant’s breach of duty be a material cause of the claimant’s injury.
  • Proportionality requires that damages reflect the degree of contribution by each party.
  • The Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 allows courts to apportion liability based on respective contributions.
  • Defendants should not be held liable for harm they did not cause.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal in Holtby v Brigham Cowan (Hull) Ltd clarified that in negligence cases involving divisible injuries from multiple sources, each defendant’s liability is confined to their proven contribution to the harm. This ensures damages are apportioned fairly, in accordance with causation and proportionality, without making any one employer responsible for injuries attributable to overall cumulative exposure involving multiple employers.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal