Withdrawal of nutrition and hydration would not offend right to life – Strasbourg Court – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted June 24th, 2015 in accidents, human rights, medical treatment, news, personal injuries by sally

‘In an important step away from Pretty v UK, the Grand Chamber of the Strasbourg Court has upheld the right of to die with dignity by ruling that there would be no violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights if artificial nutrition and hydration were to be withdrawn from a patient in a persistent vegetative state.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 16th June 2015

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off on Withdrawal of nutrition and hydration would not offend right to life – Strasbourg Court – UK Human Rights Blog

Courts given stronger powers to strike out ‘fundamentally dishonest’ claims, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

Posted June 18th, 2015 in fraud, insurance, news, personal injuries, striking out by sally

‘Courts in England and Wales now have the power to strike out personal injury claims in their entirety if the person making the claim has been fundamentally dishonest, even if parts of the claim were genuine.’
Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 17th June 2015

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off on Courts given stronger powers to strike out ‘fundamentally dishonest’ claims, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

Connolly v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1339 (QB) and Buswell v Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) – Zenith PI Blog

‘Multiple witness statements and credibility of witnesses.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 4th June 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Connolly v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1339 (QB) and Buswell v Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) – Zenith PI Blog

Gulati v MGN Ltd – WLR Daily

Gulati v MGN Ltd [2015] EWHC 1482 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 232

‘Damages for infringement of privacy rights should compensate not merely for distress but also, if appropriate, for a loss of privacy or autonomy arising out of the infringement as such, which might include, if appropriate, a sum to compensate for damage to dignity or standing so far as that was meaningful and not already compensated under the distress element.’

WLR Daily, 21st May 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on Gulati v MGN Ltd – WLR Daily

UK Supreme Court judges show little appetite for extending ‘Fairchild’ exception to other scenarios, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

‘Comments made by some of the UK’s top judges during a recent ruling appear to signal their reluctance to extend the so-called ‘Fairchild’ exception to the normal rules of causation to cover any more types of damage or injury, an expert has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 26th May 2015

Source: www.out-law.co.com

Comments Off on UK Supreme Court judges show little appetite for extending ‘Fairchild’ exception to other scenarios, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

‘I Started Something I Couldn’t Finish’ – Wasted Costs Application Against Legal Representatives – Zenith PI Blog

Posted May 21st, 2015 in costs, news, personal injuries, practice directions by sally

‘Anecdotal evidence suggests that Defendants in failed personal injury claims are increasingly making use of the Court’s wasted costs powers in an attempt to recover costs from Claimants’ legal representatives. Often this is in cases where the Defence is either explicitly or implicitly one of fraud. In such cases the terms of the ATE insurance (if indeed any is held by the Claimant) are often such that the policy does not pay out. Thus, Defendants are sometimes left in the position of holding a costs order against a ‘man of straw’. To circumvent this problem it seems some Defendants are making costs applications against legal representatives directly, using the wasted costs jurisdiction. The recent case of Kagalovsky v Balmore Invest Ltd [2015] EWHC 1337 (QB)[1] provides a salutary reminder of the difficulties a party faces when seeking to persuade a Court to make a wasted costs order.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on ‘I Started Something I Couldn’t Finish’ – Wasted Costs Application Against Legal Representatives – Zenith PI Blog

Appeal court upholds strike-out of litigant-in-person’s claim over non-compliance – Litigation Futures

‘A litigant-in-person has lost his claim for psychiatric injury against the Stobart Group and associated companies over his failure to serve a medical report.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 15th May 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Appeal court upholds strike-out of litigant-in-person’s claim over non-compliance – Litigation Futures

Boy who suffered brain damage due to Harrogate hospital failings to get £10m – The Guardian

Posted May 15th, 2015 in birth, compensation, hospitals, negligence, news, personal injuries by tracey

‘A six-year-old boy with cerebral palsy is to receive a £10m care and rehabilitation package from Harrogate and district NHS foundation trust after it admitted failing to provide proper care during his birth that resulted in devastating neurological injuries.’

Full story

The Guardian, 14th May 2015

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Boy who suffered brain damage due to Harrogate hospital failings to get £10m – The Guardian

Paralysed marine sues MoD for £8m over beach dive accident – BBC News

Posted May 13th, 2015 in accidents, armed forces, news, personal injuries by tracey

‘A marine left paralysed after diving into shallow waters in the Canary Islands is suing the military for £8m. Spencer Vaughan, 27, from Cwmbran in south Wales, broke his neck in the Gran Canaria incident while on an adventure training exercise in July 2009.’

Full story

BBC News, 12th May 2015

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off on Paralysed marine sues MoD for £8m over beach dive accident – BBC News

“Fundamental dishonesty” and striking out in personal injury cases: ten key procedural points – Zenith PI

Posted May 12th, 2015 in news, personal injuries, striking out by tracey

‘The rule as to “fundamental” dishonesty has attracted a lot of attraction (and a lot of heated debate). However there has been very little examination of the details of the Act and the consequent procedural consequences. There are 10 key points which every personal injury litigator must be aware of.’

Full story

Zenith PI, 9th May 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on “Fundamental dishonesty” and striking out in personal injury cases: ten key procedural points – Zenith PI

Participation in an illegal joint enterprise is not a bar to recovery in a claim for personal injury – Zenith PI Blog

‘Personal injury arises out of criminal acts as well as legal ones. The good news is this is not a bar to recovery.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 8th May 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Participation in an illegal joint enterprise is not a bar to recovery in a claim for personal injury – Zenith PI Blog

Jackson: Lawyers must say “bluntly” if claim has no prospect of success – Litigation Futures

Posted May 11th, 2015 in law firms, limitations, negligence, news, personal injuries by sally

‘Lord Justice Jackson has dismissed a negligence claim against Veale Wasbrough, now national firm Veale Wasbrough Vizards, and the barrister it instructed to advise on a personal injury case.’
Full story

Litigation Futures, 11th May 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on Jackson: Lawyers must say “bluntly” if claim has no prospect of success – Litigation Futures

Monthly Roundup – Costs and Budgeting – Zenith PI

‘April has seen a great deal of discussion on costs and budgeting. Here is a review of what else we have been writing about this month.’

Full story

Zenith PI, 6th May 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off on Monthly Roundup – Costs and Budgeting – Zenith PI

High Court refuses 100% success fee because trial had not started – Litigation Futures

‘The High Court has refused to allow a personal injury claimant a 100% success fee on the grounds that a trial had not started before the case was settled, even though a hearing had begun.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 8th May 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off on High Court refuses 100% success fee because trial had not started – Litigation Futures

Salford Royal Hospital: Woman awarded £8m after NHS blunder – BBC News

‘A pregnant woman left brain damaged after her heart was accidentally punctured during an NHS operation has won an £8m compensation pay-out.’

Full story

BBC News, 5th May 2015

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off on Salford Royal Hospital: Woman awarded £8m after NHS blunder – BBC News

Down the pan: Council pays man £341k after falling off toilet – Daily Telegraph

Posted May 5th, 2015 in compensation, local government, news, personal injuries by sally

‘Fylde Council in Lancashire, confirms it ends eight years of legal wrangle by settling claim involving man who fell when lavatory bowl collapsed.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 3rd May 2015

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Down the pan: Council pays man £341k after falling off toilet – Daily Telegraph

McCracken (a protected party by his litigation friend) v Smith (Damian) and others – WLR Daily

McCracken (a protected party by his litigation friend) v Smith (Damian) and others [2015] EWCA Civ 380; [2015] WLR (D) 183

‘Where a claimant’s injury had two separate causes, one of which was his own criminal conduct in a joint enterprise with another, amounting to turpitude for the purposes of the defence of ex turpi causa, and one of which was a third party’s negligence, the relationship between the claimant’s turpitude and his negligence claim against the third party was not such as to debar his claim against the defendant in reliance on the principle of ex turpi causa. The correct approach of the court in such cases was to give effect to both causes of the injury by allowing the claimant to claim in negligence against the third party but, if negligence was established, by reducing any recoverable damages in accordance with the principles of contributory negligence so as to reflect the claimant’s own fault and responsibility for the injury.’

WLR Daily, 22nd April 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on McCracken (a protected party by his litigation friend) v Smith (Damian) and others – WLR Daily

Procedure – 39 Essex Chambers

Posted April 29th, 2015 in anonymity, costs, damages, dismissal, legislation, media, news, personal injuries by sally

‘Section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 comes into force on 13 April 2015.

Section 57, which introduces the presumption of dismissal in personal injury claims where the claimant has been found to be fundamentally dishonest in relation to a primary or related claim, comes into force on 13 April 20151. The explanatory notes to the Bill for this Act confirm that this provision is designed to extend the power identified in Summers v Fairclough Homes Ltd2 beyond the very exceptional circumstances required there under for an abusive claim to be struck out at the end of trial. The reference to a ‘related claim’ makes it clear that the Shah v Ul-Haq3 style claimant, who dishonestly supports the fraudulent claim of another, will also stand to lose their own (honest) claim.’

Full story

39 Essex Chambers, April 2015

Source: www.39essex.com

Comments Off on Procedure – 39 Essex Chambers

Review of Costs Budgeting Process by Jackson LJ – Zenith Chambers

Posted April 29th, 2015 in budgets, costs, negligence, news, personal injuries, telephone hearings by sally

‘Following the introduction of costs budgeting as part of his wide-ranging package of civil justice reforms, Jackson LJ is now undertaking a review of the process.’

Full story (PDF)

Zenith Chambers, 20th April 2015

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

Comments Off on Review of Costs Budgeting Process by Jackson LJ – Zenith Chambers

Mind the gap: immigration rules and human rights are not coterminous – Free Movement

Posted April 22nd, 2015 in human rights, immigration, news, personal injuries, tribunals, visas by sally

‘In a useful case the Upper Tribunal addresses one of the “mind the gap” differences between the Immigration Rules and the requirements of human rights law. There is a growing body of case law that recognises that the two bodies of law are not, contrary to the Home Office position, coterminous. The latest is R (on the application of Chen) v Secretary of State for the Home Department) (Appendix FM – Chikwamba – temporary separation – proportionality) IJR [2015] UKUT 189 (IAC) on, you guessed it, the House of Lords case of Chikwamba and the proportionality of having to travel abroad in order to apply from abroad.’

Full story

Free Movement, 22nd April 2015

Source: www.freemovement.org.uk

Comments Off on Mind the gap: immigration rules and human rights are not coterminous – Free Movement