For the claimant:

The claimant suffered spinal injuries in a RTA which resulted in paralysis from the neck down.  At the time of the accident he was age 21 and unemployed.  Although his working career had been brief, mainly in warehouse and semi-skilled roles, we established that he also had a keen interest in computing, which he had been studying at night school prior to his accident.

We were able to demonstrate that, on the balance of probabilities, the claimant would have developed his skills and experience, improved his employability and obtained better paid, more skilled work.  By analysing the characteristics of his local labour market and earnings data by age, we were able to determine his likely pre-injury earnings progression through his twenties and beyond in a broad category of occupations that matched his educational and occupational profile.

For the defendant:

The claimant, of independent means, held a highly paid, responsible post in a well known institution.  She had been approached to head a start-up dot.com business, but unfortunately suffered back injuries in a RTA just before she was due to commence work.

The claim was substantial and the claimant's employment expert had built a plausible case for future career growth based on her history and experience at her previous employer, either with this or another dot.com firm.  The argument was put forward that without the claimant's input (due to the accident) the dot.com firm had to liquidate.

We established, through significant original research, that the infamous 'dot.com bubble' had coincidentally burst two weeks after the claimant's intended start date and the company would have folded in any event. It follows, the claimant would not have 'easily', as the other side's expert put it, obtained an executive post in another dot.com company. The research carried out to support our contention was conducted primarily on the world wide web, including tracking down historic web pages of the failed dot.com firm. 

Joint instruction:

A young student, 17 at the time of the accident, suffered severe injuries and was wheelchair dependant.  He was in his first year of A-levels and had aspirations to attend university and had considered a career in IT and design.  At the time of the instruction, when the claimant was 19, he was studying a 2-year diploma in computer studies.

We conducted an analysis of his family background influences and education and we determined at the time of the accident his accumulated UCAS points indicated him being offered a place at a good university.

His current situation still opened up the possibility of a university place but it was likely his studies would be interrupted by health and other related difficulties.  Because of the considerable adaptations required at a potential workplace it was our opinion that he would probably commence work on a part-time basis, perhaps within a university, probably in a support role, and at which he would earn considerably less than had he not suffered the accident.  We were also able to enhance his earnings by the inclusion of paid casual work whilst at university.