Coles & Ors v Hetherton & Ors
Decision date: 20 December 2013
Neutral citation: [2013] EWCA Civ 1704
Court: Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Insurance classification confidence: high
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
A short description of the case, material issue, and outcome where supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this overview: high
This appeal concerned whether an insurer (RSAI), subrogated to its insureds, could recover in tort the full invoiced cost of repairs performed under RSAI’s repair scheme, and whether the cost of a courtesy car was recoverable. The court answered the three preliminary issues in favour of the claimants: the proper measure of loss for a repaired (not written-off) vehicle is the reasonable cost of repair; reasonableness is judged by reference to what a person in the claimant’s position could obtain on the open market; and an insurer who has indemnified the insured by paying no more than that reasonable repair cost can recover that amount. The court also held that the modest courtesy-car charge (£11/day) was recoverable as a contractual benefit and dismissed the appeal against the strike-out/summary-judgment orders.
Ratio decidendi
The legal reasoning necessary to the outcome, where it can safely be identified from the judgment.
AI confidence in this ratio summary: high
The binding ratio supported by the judgment as supplied is that (1) where a vehicle is reasonably repaired the claimant’s loss is measured by the reasonable cost of repair; (2) the reasonableness of a repair charge is to be judged by reference to what a person in the claimant’s position could obtain on the open market; and (3) where an insurer indemnifies the insured by paying no more than that reasonable cost, that amount is recoverable; additionally, a replacement/courtesy car provided as a contractual benefit under the policy is a recoverable head of damage.
Obiter dicta
Judicial observations that were not necessary to the outcome, where they can safely be identified.
AI confidence in this obiter summary: low
No clear obiter dicta can safely be identified from the supplied text.
Warning
The automated summary was prepared from selected parts of a longer judgment; consult the original decision for the complete reasoning. The middle of the judgment was omitted; therefore some detailed reasoning, factual examples, and any additional findings in those omitted passages are not reflected above.