CAMERON McCABE
v
SCOTTISH AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES PLC

Trial before McKINNON J. At Carlisle 26^th, 27^th January and 1^st February 1993

CASE REPORT

1. The Plaintiff was born on the 31st July 1956 and so was 30 at the date of the accident on the 18th May 1987.

2. His legs were crushed by a small industrial locomotive, during the course of his employment as a labourer at the Defendants' peat works. Liability was admitted.

3. The Plaintiff sustained compound fractures of both tibia and fibula, with various associated injuries, particularly to both knee joints. He was an in-patient for six months, and he then underwent further operations in August 1988, September 1989 and October 1990. He was wheelchair dependent until about 19 months after the accident, and there was severe residual pain in both legs and knees, which restricted the Plaintiff's walking ability to about 200 yards at the best. There were various other residual disabilities in relation to the legs which had effectively crippled the Plaintiff. He was expected to have to use a wheelchair for outdoor use within about one to four years, and thereafter for general use. Total replacement of both knee joints was expected to be necessary, probably not before the end of the 1990s.

4. In addition, the Plaintiff was severely incapacitated mentally. He was suffering from a mild to moderate degree of clinical depression, with phobic anxiety symptoms in the form of fear of traffic in the road, fear of walking in public because of the risk of falling, and because of the worry of drawing attention to himself. He had been unable to make the psychological adjustment to the physical pain resulting from his injuries, and he had withdrawn and isolated himself from the outside world. There was little prospect of any recovery from these psychological complications, and the Plaintiff was likely to remain dependant on others for his daily bodily, physical and social needs.

5. The Plaintiff was not expected to resume any form of gainful employment.

6. The Plaintiff's case and the Judge's findings were as follows:-

PAIN, SUFFERING AND LOSS OF AMENITY This was almost as bad a case of broken legs as is likely to occur. It was worse than many bilateral amputations, in that there was severe continuing pain, and a very substantial psychological disability	50,000
LOSS OF EARNINGS TO DATE	15,534
FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS It was agreed that the Plaintiff's wage would have been £7,120 p.a. at the date of trial. It was contended on behalf of the Plaintiff that an appropriate multiplier, to retirement age 65, was 15. The Defendants contended for a retirement age of 62. The multiplier was not agreed. It was probable that the Plaintiff's pre-existing epilepsy would prevent him from working for the last few years and because of this, and accepting that the Plaintiff would have retired at 62, the Judge decided on a multiplier of 12 £7,120 x 12 =	85,440
CARE TO TRIAL Mother's and sister's care	37,320
FUTURE CARE It was contended on behalf of the Plaintiff that the future should be divided into two separate periods, the first being until he needs to use a wheelchair, and the second being from then onwards. Using a life multiplier of 17, and an assumed expectation of life to age 74, the remaining 38 years of the Plaintiff's life were divided as follows: First Period Second Period First period Second Period Four Years Thirty-Four Years £8,716 x 2 = £23,575 x 15 = Multiplier 2 Multiplier 15	17,432 353,625
HOLIDAYS First period Second period £2,350 x 2 = £1,451 £1,523 x 15 =	4,700 1451 22,845
DECORATION AND D.I.Y. To trial at an estimated £350 p.a. £350 p.a. x 17	2,012 5,950
OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY Capital cost Annual cost	4,336 6,591
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES Extra cost of training shoes to trial Future extra cost of trainers	500 1,700
ACCOMMODATION This claim was put on the basis that the Plaintiff would provide the money to permit the purchase of the council house in which he lived with his mother (taking advantage of the right to buy discount): the purchase price was assumed to be £28,000. The losses in purchase were therefore £28,000 x 2% x 17 The losses in adaptation were The increased running costs were to trial In future (£700 x 17)	9,520 34,767   4,025 11,900
OUT OF POCKET EXPENSES	573
BENEFITS RECEIVED This was a pre-Social Security Act 1989 case, and therefore the old law applied.
TOTALS: Award exclusive of interest Interest (calculated taking interim payments into account)   March 1995 value	668,770 22,291 £690,989 (£726,832)

****