TUI Ltd (Respondent) v Griffiths (Appellant)

On appeal from [2021] EWCA Civ 1442
The appellant, Mr Griffiths, purchased an all-inclusive holiday from the respondent. During that holiday, he suffered gastric illness as a result (he alleges) of contaminated food and drink consumed in the hotel.
Mr Griffiths subsequently brought a claim against the respondent for breach of contract and pursuant to the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992. At trial, Mr Griffiths relied on the expert evidence of a microbiologist in relation to causation, who opined that his illness had been caused by the food and drink consumed at the hotel. The respondent did not rely on its own expert evidence. The Judge in the County Court held that she was not satisfied that the medical evidence showed that it was more likely than not that the appellant's illness had been caused by eating food and drink at the hotel, dismissing the claim.
On appeal in the High Court, this decision was overturned. On appeal to the Court of Appeal, the High Court decision was overturned. The appellant now appeals to the Supreme Court.
The issue in is:
Whether, and (if so), in what circumstances, can the court evaluate and reject what is described as an "uncontroverted" expert’s report?
The Supreme Court unanimously dismisses allows Mr Griffith's appeal.
More information is available on our website: