A material difference in material contribution claims – Mills & Reeve

Posted January 19th, 2024 in appeals, causation, news, personal injuries by sally

‘If you’ve ever felt perplexed by the concept of material contribution or its treatment of divisible and indivisible injuries, you’re not alone.’

Full Story

Mills & Reeve, 18th January 2024

Source: www.mills-reeve.com

CDE v Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust; the material contribution elephant in the room – 12 King’s Bench Walk

‘Andrew Roy KC considers the implications of the Court of Appeal’s recent decision CDE v Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWCA Civ 1330 in respect of the vexed and important issue of material contribution.’

Full Story

12 King's Bench Walk, 22nd November 2023

Source: clinicalnegligence.blog

Material Contribution and Holmes v Poeton Holdings Limited: One Issue Down, More to Go – 12 King’s Bench Walk

‘Henry Charles looks at a recent decision from the Court of Appeal which settles the longstanding question of whether material contribution applies to cases of divisible injury.’

Full Story

12 King's Bench Walk, 28th November 2023

Source: clinicalnegligence.blog

Griffiths v. TUI UK Limited: Evidence, Challenge and Fairness – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The central question facing the Supreme Court in Griffiths v TUI UK Limited [2023] UKSC 48 concerned the extent to which a party must put criticisms of a witness’ evidence to him in cross-examination. The Supreme Court made clear that the general rule in civil cases is that a party is required to challenge by cross-examination the evidence of any witness (whether factual or expert) if he wishes to submit that the evidence should not be accepted by the court. Importantly, this rule is not confined to allegations that the witness is dishonest. The rule is, however, a flexible one; it will not always be necessary for every point of challenge to be put to a witness, and in some cases (such as where evidence is “manifestly incredible”) it may not apply at all. Although the Supreme Court gave a conceptually clear answer to the question before it, difficult practical issues are likely to continue to arise for trial advocates who wish to challenge factual or expert witness evidence.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 3rd January 2024

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Griffiths v TUI [2023] UKSC 48: The Supreme Court unanimously agrees with MC Hammer – “U can’t touch this” – St John’s Chambers

‘The Supreme Court today handed down its long-awaited judgment in the case of Griffths v TUI [2023] UKSC 48. It is a thorough, important, and helpful statement (or, depending on one’s view, re-statement) of the laws and rules of evidence, what must be put to a witness before that evidence can be challenged in closing submissions, and the limits on any Judge’s power to dismiss relevant evidence which has not been challenged (or challenged sufficiently) at trial. At the heart of the judgment is the Court’s assessment of what it means for the parties to have a fair trial.’

Full Story

St John's Chambers, 29th November 2023

Source: www.stjohnschambers.co.uk

Fairness Trumps All: Supreme Court Reverses the Decision of the Court of Appeal in TUI UK Ltd v Griffiths – Ropewalk Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has handed down its highly anticipated decision in TUI UK Ltd v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal of the Claimant, reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal.’

Full Story

Ropewalk Chambers, 30th November 2023

Source: ropewalk.co.uk

High Court strikes out top footballer’s negligence claim against law firm – Legal Futures

Posted December 4th, 2023 in causation, company directors, damages, law firms, loans, negligence, news by tracey

‘The High Court has struck out a £6m negligence claim brought by a former Premier League footballer against City firm Charles Russell Speechleys (CRS).’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 4th December 2023

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

You Can’t Lose What You Never Had: Ali v HSF Logistics Polska SP Zoo – Pump Court Chambers

Posted November 23rd, 2023 in accidents, causation, chambers articles, ex turpi causa, news, road traffic by sally

‘Mr Ali had incurred credit hire charges of over £21,500 following an accident in which his car was damaged. The Defendant argued that since Mr Ali’s car did not have a valid MOT, and there was no evidence of any intention to obtain one during the period of the car hire, the claim for credit hire could not succeed on grounds of illegality. The car was parked at the time of the accident.’

Full Story

Pump Court Chambers, 19th October 2023

Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com

Vicarious Liability – where are we now? – Gatehouse Chambers

Posted November 21st, 2023 in causation, chambers articles, news, sexual grooming, vicarious liability by sally

‘Vicarious liability has been a hot topic for more than five years. Every time you look away there seems to have been a new judgment. The Supreme Court has had three goes (WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC v Various Claimants[1], Barclays Bank PLC v Various Claimants and Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses v BXB) at installing some kind of flood defences to keep the tide of vicarious liability within boundaries and each time the tide retreats a little. MXX v A Secondary School is an example of the tide retreating a little since BXB. It is a reminder that the most difficult hurdle for claimants to overcome in the two stage test of vicarious liability for non-employees is the second part of the test – the close connection.’

Full Story

Gatehouse Chambers, 20th October 2023

Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk

English court issues reminder of burden of proof in product liability cases – OUT-LAW.com

Posted October 27th, 2023 in appeals, burden of proof, causation, damages, news by sally

‘The English Court of Appeal has reminded claimants that, where there are competing explanations for causation in an action for damages, it is for them to prove their case on the balance of probabilities.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 26th October 2023

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

Fail to Plead, Fail to Succeed – Parklane Plowden Chambers

‘The case of Sindra Bilal & Anor v St George’s University NHS Foundation [2023] EWCA Civ 605 provides a useful reminder to ensure issues are pleaded if they are to be advanced at trial.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 16th July 2023

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Consent and Factual Causation – Two Recent Cases – QMLR

‘Two cases from the past year illustrate the importance of factual causation as an issue in litigation concerning consent to treatment and provide various reminders on points of practice that will be of interest to those working in the field of clinical negligence.’

Full Story

QMLR, 18th July 2023

Source: 1corqmlr.com

Montgomery and Material Contribution – QMLR

‘In January 2023, Mr Justice Ritchie handed down an important decision dealing with Montgomery and causation in birth injury claims.’

Full Story

QMLR, 18th July 2023

Source: 1corqmlr.com

Bilal and Malik v St George’s University Hospital NHS Trust [2023] EWCA Civ 605 – 3PB

Posted August 1st, 2023 in causation, hospitals, negligence, news, personal injuries by sally

‘Sidra Bilal, Hassaan Aziz Malik (Administrators on behalf of the estate of Mukhtar Malik, deceased) v St George’s University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, [2023] EWCA Civ 605 provides an interesting insight into the post-Montgomery landscape. It provides further clarification on informed consent as well as reminding practitioners of the importance of tightly crafted pleadings in clinical negligence claims.’

Full Story

3PB, 12th July 2023

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

New Judgment: McCulloch and others (Appellants) v Forth Valley Health Board (Respondent) (Scotland) – UKSC Blog

Posted July 13th, 2023 in causation, medical treatment, medicines, negligence, news, Scotland, Supreme Court by sally

‘This case is concerned with the extent to which a doctor is required, under the duty of care owed to a patient, to inform the patient about alternative possible treatments to the one that is being recommended.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 12th July 2023

Source: ukscblog.com

Case Preview: McCulloch and Ors v Forth Valley Health Board – UKSC Blog

‘In this post, Anna Walsh (Partner) and Nicole Ellerby (Associate) in CMS’ defendant medical malpractice team consider the awaited decision from the Supreme Court in the Scottish case of McCulloch and Ors v Forth Valley Health Board [2021] CSIH 21.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 3rd July 2023

Source: ukscblog.com

A common law duty of care to issue an Osman warning? – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted June 13th, 2023 in causation, domestic violence, duty of care, negligence, news, police by sally

‘What such an exceptional case might look like has remained a matter of speculation. Until now. On 9 May Ritchie J handed down judgment in Woodcock v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [2023] EWHC 1062 (KB), which, if it remains good law, is likely to have a significant impact upon the law concerning the liability of the police in the tort of negligence.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 12th June 2023

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Dove v Assistant Coroner for Teeside [2023] EWCA Civ 289 (17 March 2023) – Parklane Plowden

‘Mrs Dove’s daughter took her own life after DWP benefits were withdrawn. In September 2021, the Divisional Court refused her application under s13 of the Coroners Act 1988 to quash the Coroner’s determination and direct a new inquest. The Divisional Court considered that the question of ‘how’ someone died in a Jamieson inquest was directed only to the means by which the deceased died, and did not encompass the wider circumstances of their death. In this case, the Court of Appeal considered the meaning of ‘by what means’.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 29th March 2023

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Dove (Part 2): Article 2 ECHR, Rabone, and Responsibility – Doughty Street Chambers

‘Last week [24 March] the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Dove [2023] EWCA Civ 289, an appeal against the Divisional Court’s decision not to order a new inquest into the death of Jodey Whiting, in proceedings brought by her mother Joy Dove. Ms Whiting died a self-inflicted death in the community, after a mental health crisis, in which the decision of the Department of Work and Pensions to cease her benefits was said to have played a contributory role. An inquest in 2017 came to a conclusion of “suicide” (§1). In an earlier post I dealt with the first, successful, ground of appeal: that because of fresh evidence it was in the interests of justice to order a new Jamieson inquest. In this post I examine the Court of Appeal’s analysis of the case from the point of view of the engagement of Article 2 ECHR.’

Full Story

Doughty Street Chambers, 24th March 2023

Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk

Dove (Part 1): Jamieson Inquests, Causation, and Conclusions – Doughty Street Chambers

‘Last week [20 March] the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Dove [2023] EWCA Civ 289, an appeal against the Divisional Court’s decision not to order a new inquest into the death of Jodey Whiting, in proceedings brought by her mother Joy Dove. Ms Whiting died a self-inflicted death in the community, after a mental health crisis, in which the decision of the Department of Work and Pensions to cease her benefits was said to have played a contributory role. An inquest in 2017 came to a conclusion of “suicide” (§1).’

Full Story

Doughty Street Chambers, 20th March 2023

Source: insights.doughtystreet.co.uk