• Home
• Anthony Johnson

Anthony Johnson

• Call: 2006
• Email: ajohnson@tgchambers.com

Notable Cases

• Lawrence v. Kent CC [2012] EWCA Civ 493 (Court of Appeal, 26.04.12): Led by Simon Browne QC in this second appeal arising from a claim brought under the Highways Act 1980. Although the Court of Appeal accepted the Claimant's main ground of appeal that opinion evidence of eye-witnesses is admissible in civil proceedings (overturning the High Court's ruling to the contrary), it allowed the Defendant's cross-appeal and substituted its own finding that the hazard was not dangerous and that in so finding the trial judge had failed to properly balance the public and private interests that were at play. The Court also discussed the approach that an appellate court should take to appeals on questions of contested fact.
• Bourne Leisure v. Shakespeare (QBD, 29.02.12): Successfully represented the Respondent who had slipped on liquid that had been spilled on the dancefloor at the Defendant's Butlins Bognor Regis. Butterfield J. upheld the trial judge's decision that the Appellant was liable to the Respondent under section 2(2) of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 on account of the fact that the Defendant's inspection regime was insufficient, and that the Defendant should have taken some steps, albeit minor ones that would not ruin the atmosphere in the venue, to enforce its policy of preventing guests from taking drinks onto the dancefloor given the obvious risk of spillage. He rejected the Appellant's submissions that the trial judge had imposed too high a duty on the Defendant that was effectively a counsel of perfection, and that any reasonably practicable improvements to the Defendant's system would not have made a difference in any event.
• Edley v. Norfolk CC (Norwich CC, 19.10.11) : Represented the successful Claimant in her claim arising from an attack by a patient in the Secure Unit where she was employed. The Judge accepted that, although the relevant case-law sets the bar very high for actions of this nature, the Defendant ought to have been aware of the attacker's propensity for violence and that its system of work was deficient.
• Osmond v. Gammon (Winchester CC 06.09.11) : Represented the Defendant in the first known appellate decision dealing with the interpretation of the term 'excursion' under the Cancellation of Contracts made in a Consumer's Home or Place of Work Regulations 2008 and associated European legislation.
• Kent County Council v. Lawrence [2011] EWHC 1590 (QB) : Represented the Claimant in this appeal against a determination in her favour in a highway tripping claim. Eady J. held that the trial judge had not misunderstood the nature of the statutory duty and had not applied the wrong test, but he had taken into account an irrelevant consideration, namely the subjective opinions of eye-witnesses about the danger posed by the defect.
• Smith v. KRG Transport (Winchester CC, 06.12.10) : Led by Nigel Wilkinson QC in this purported appeal from HHJ Griggs decision (below), where Holroyd J. formed the view that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear a second appeal in the matter.
• KRG Transport v. Smith (Plymouth CC, 25.06.10) : The Circuit Judge (HHJ Griggs) overturned a District Judge's decision that the Claimant had acted reasonably in mitigation of his loss by hiring a vehicle for 285 days in circumstances where he did not use the cheque that he eventually received from the Defendant's insurers to replace his own accident-damaged vehicle.
• Sidiqui v. Probus Insurance (London Mercantile Court, 12.08.09) : Judge Mackie QC, sitting as a High Court Judge, upheld the interlocutory appeal challenged by the Claimant, which debarred him from raising the issue of impecuniosity at the final hearing in the matter.
• Colstock v. Tesco Plc (Walsall CC, 10.08.09) : Resisted an appeal against a decision to dramatically reduce the period of recoverable hire on the basis of delays for which the Claimant was ultimately responsible.
• Balls v. St. Edmundsbury BC (Bury St. Edmunds CC, 18.06.09, LTL: AC0122698) : At the time of writing, the only reported case dealing with the interpretation of the definition of the term "highway" for the purposes of section 41 of the Highways Act 1980.
• Bailey v. Mackenzie (Colchester CC, 29.01.09) : Obtained judgment of £25,000 on behalf of the Claimant, an amateur footballer who was injured by a dangerous tackle during a game in the Colchester Sunday League.
• Hussain v. Dhawan (Newcastle CC, 07.11.08, LTL: AC0119878) : Resisted the Claimant's claim for diminution in value on the basis that he had failed to make out his claim, in spite of the fact that an engineer had examined his vehicle and prepared a 'diminution report'.  The claim was treated as a 'test case' by both sides and the judgment discusses the factors that apply to such claims in general.
• Good v. De Klee (Haywards Heath CC, 30.08.07, LTL: AC0115494) : The District Judge rejected the Claimant's diminution claim on the basis that his 'expert' engineer had not actually examined the vehicle in question, and thus his report was based entirely upon theory and speculation.
• Dixon v. Arriva (Clerkenwell CC, 06.08.07, CL 08/620) : The first reported case in which a Defendant successfully challenged the enforceability of the Drive Assist credit hire agreement on the basis that the Claimant had not signed the actual agreement; rather his signature had been imposed onto it by electronic means.

Publications

• "Measuring loss: vehicle diminution claims"- New Law Journal 16/5/08
• Contributed a chapter to Kevan and Ellis on Credit Hire (xpl publishing, 2008)
• Editor of Personal Injury Brief Update newsletter
• Regular contributor to Personal Injury Brief Update Law Journal
• Speaker at CLT Conference: Credit hire Agreements Law& Practice, 2010 and 2011
• Various articles on developments in credit hire law for a wide range of publications

Memberships

Personal Injury Bar Association

London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association

South Eastern Circuit