Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Mazahar Hussain v EUI Ltd

5 November 2024
[2024] EWCC 16
County Court
A taxi driver crashed. He claimed lots of money for a fancy replacement car while his was being fixed. The court said he could only get money for a normal replacement car, not an expensive taxi, except for the part he needed for personal use. He also had to pay back some money for keeping his broken car in a storage lot when he could've parked it at home.

Key Facts

  • Road traffic accident on 27 May 2021.
  • Claimant was a self-employed private hire taxi driver.
  • Liability conceded by the Defendant.
  • Vehicle damage (£5,116.87) admitted and paid.
  • Claim for credit hire (£33,140.52), storage and recovery (£1,008), and other expenses.
  • Claimant hired a replacement taxi-plated vehicle from 29 May 2021 to 1 November 2021.
  • Dispute centered on credit hire and storage and recovery costs.
  • Claimant argued he fell under exceptions in *Hussain v EUI Ltd* [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB) for exceeding loss of profit in credit hire.

Legal Principles

The proper measure of damages for the loss of a profit-earning chattel is the loss of profit.

Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB)

Exceptions to the loss of profit rule for profit-earning chattels exist where the claimant acted reasonably in mitigating loss, even if hire costs significantly exceed lost profit.

Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB)

The burden of proof lies on the claimant to demonstrate they fall within one of the *Hussain* exceptions.

This case

Outcomes

Claimant's claim for credit hire costs significantly exceeding lost profits was largely rejected.

The claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy any of the exceptions outlined in *Hussain* concerning the credit hire costs, except for a limited allowance under the second exception for private use.

Claimant's claim for storage and recovery costs was partially rejected.

The court found it unreasonable for the claimant not to have stored the damaged vehicle on his driveway, given the minimal risk to visitors.

General damages for personal injury were awarded at £4,000.

Based on the medical report and JSB Guidelines.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.