Hodges v. Harland & Wolff, Limited
England and Wales Court of Appeal
1 All ER 1086 (1965)
- Written by Elliot Stern, JD
Facts
Hodges (plaintiff) was a painter who operated a diesel-driven air compressor as part of his employment with Harland & Wolff, Limited (defendant). On one occasion, the spindle on the air compressor caught hold of Hodges’s clothes, tearing them and causing Hodges severe bodily injury, including the severing of his penis. Hodges sued Harland & Wolff for damages, including the loss of future earnings. An initial decision was made to proceed with a trial by judge, but the judge in the lower court determined that the case would be tried by a jury. The judge considered the line of cases that held that trial by judge should be the standard for personal-injury cases and took special note of the principle of uniformity for such decisions. However, he determined that trial by jury was the appropriate mode of trial under the circumstances. Harland & Wolff appealed to the England and Wales Court of Appeal to seek a reversal and a determination to proceed with trial by judge.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Denning, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 833,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
