Description
The Claimant sought damages for private physiotherapy treatment. To evidence this claim he provided invoices and forms from the physiotherapy service detailing the treatment and cost. The Defendant argued, on the eve of trial, that there was no evidence that the Claimant had actually paid these costs or was legally obliged to pay them. In evidence the Claimant said that he had thought that the Defendant had sent him to physiotherapy and had presumed that he would not be expected to pay the bill. He did not know who had paid. A couple of days after trial the Claimant produced a letter from the physiotherapy service which stated that the cost of physiotherapy formed part of his claim and would be pursued against the Defendant's insurers. The judge refused to admit the letter into evidence stating that the letter should have been produced earlier to allow the Defendant an opportunity to consider the case. He rejected the physiotherapy claim on the basis that it was clear that the Claimant's evidence that he did not believe that he was liable for the costs. The Claimant appealed on the basis that he should not have been precluded from adducing evidence to counter an argument which, in itself, was raised late by the Defendant.
The Court of Appeal held that the Claimant's evidence that he thought the Defendant was responsible for paying the charges did not mean that he had no liability to pay. He was assisting the court in establishing his understanding of the agreement. It was not common for the actual payment for treatment to be shown with evidence of who had paid the bill. An invoice would normally be sufficient. The judge should either have excluded the Defendant's late point on the payment or adjourned the judgment to enable questions arising from the letter produced to be raised.
