COL v The United Arab Emirates

Damages for modern slavery should reflect the claimant’s complete experience and avoid double recovery. False imprisonment and injury to feelings will ordinarily be assessed together where the latter is integral to the loss of liberty. A separate award for psychiatric injury remains permissible where the psychiatric harm goes beyond that inherent injury. The tapering approach for damages for false imprisonment remains binding, although its consequences depend on the facts and modern slavery involves more than detention alone. Exemplary damages may be awarded for cynical exploitation and deliberate financial advantage. Tort damages for unpaid labour are measured by the value of the services and the minimum wage applicable when the tort occurred, rather than by any later statutory uplift.

The claimant brought proceedings arising from her treatment as a domestic worker in the United Kingdom after being trafficked from the Philippines to work for a UAE diplomat and his family. Judgment had previously been entered for the claimant, with damages to be assessed. The defendant took no part in the proceedings.

The assessment concerned general damages for false imprisonment, injury to feelings and psychiatric injury, exemplary damages, unpaid wages, loss of earnings and treatment costs. The central issues included whether separate awards should be made for false imprisonment and injury to feelings, whether psychiatric injury should be assessed separately, how the taper for false-imprisonment damages applied, and how unpaid wages and future loss should be measured.

1. Assessment and structure of general damages. False imprisonment and injury to feelings were assessed together at £85,000. Injury to feelings was an integral part of the loss caused by the claimant’s false imprisonment, and it would be artificial to separate loss of liberty from the associated emotional harm. A separate award for psychiatric injury was permissible where the psychiatric injury went beyond the injury to feelings inherent in false imprisonment. The psychiatric injury award was £35,000. The overall award had to be assessed so as to avoid double recovery.
2. False-imprisonment damages. The tapering approach in Thompson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [1998] Q.B. 498, supported by subsequent Court of Appeal authority, remained applicable. The taper could not be wholly disregarded. Its effect was fact-specific, and modern slavery required recognition that forced servitude involved more than detention alone.
3. Exemplary damages. Exemplary damages of £15,000 were appropriate because the wrongdoer had acted with cynical disregard for the claimant’s rights, exploiting her for financial advantage while intending to avoid compensating her.
4. Unpaid wages. The claimant had a contractual claim under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998, including the statutory uplift under section 17(4). However, the tort measure was the sum required to put her in the position she would have occupied had the tort not occurred. That measure used the national minimum wage applicable in 2013, subject to the accommodation offset and payments already made. The unpaid-wages award was £8,967.14.
5. Loss of earnings and treatment costs. Loss of earnings was recoverable for periods in which the claimant’s psychiatric injury prevented work, but not for income she was legally prohibited from earning. The court invited further calculations using the minimum wage and permissible working hours for the earlier period, and contemporary rather than 2024 rates for later periods. Treatment costs were awarded at £2,250.
6. The assessment of loss of earnings and interest was reserved pending written calculations and submissions.

The judgment itself records that judgment for the claimant, with damages to be assessed, was entered on 19 December 2022. The present decision assessed the recoverable heads of damages in part and reserved loss of earnings and interest for further written submissions.