IDE V ATB SALES AND LEXUS FINANCIAL SERVICES T/A TOYOTA FINANCIAL SERVICES (UK) PLC V RUSSELL

[2008] EWCA Civ 424, Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Dyson and Lord Justice Thomas, 28 April 2008

Evidence – Proof of causation - Alternative theories of causation – Whether the party who had suffered the damage could prove on a balance of probabilities that a defect had caused the damage sustained - Consumer Protection Act 1987

In two joined appeals, the Court of Appeal discussed the question whether the judges’ approach had been that judged impermissible by the House of Lords in Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmunds (The Popi M) [1985] 1 WLR 948. In neither case were the appellants entitled to challenge the primary findings of the judge. The sole issue for decision in each case was whether the judge had employed the approach of Sherlock Holmes, judged impermissible by the House of Lords in the Popi M, namely that when the impossible has been ruled out, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.