Causation in whistleblowing cases – St John’s Buildings

Posted April 17th, 2020 in causation, chambers articles, disclosure, employment, news, whistleblowers by sally

‘A worker has the right not to be subjected to a detriment on the ground that s/he has made a protected disclosure. However, the test of whether the protected disclosure was the reason in the employer’s mind for subjecting the worker to the detriment, and the placement of the burden of proving the same, can be confusing. Hopefully, this short note clarifies matters.’

Full Story

St John's Buildings, April 2020

Source: stjohnsbuildings.com

The Use of Statistical Evidence in Clinical Negligence Cases – 39 Essex Chambers

Posted April 17th, 2020 in appeals, causation, chambers articles, damages, negligence, news, statistics by sally

‘Can a claimant in a clinical negligence claim who is unable to prove the precise mechanism by which a positive outcome would have been achieved still succeed on causation? Yes, held the Court of Appeal in Schembri v Marshall[1]. The judgment also provides a useful summary of authorities dealing with the use of statistics for causation purposes in clinical negligence cases.’

Full Story

39 Essex Chambers, 8th April 2020

Source: www.39essex.com

Coronial causation in a mental health context: case comment by Simon Connolly – Park Square Barristers

‘The Claimant (mother of the Deceased) applied to judicially review the Coroner’s decision and record of inquest on five grounds.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 9th April 2020

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Whistle-blowers Beware: Just because there is a PD doesn’t necessarily mean that the employer can’t respond (and damage your reputation) in order to ‘set the record straight’ – 3PB

‘Edwin Jesudason (‘C’), was a paediatric surgeon who was an honorary consultant working in the Department of Paediatric Surgery (‘DPS’) in the respondent NHS trust from 2006 until he resigned in 2012. Between 2009 and 2014 he made a series of allegations to the Trust, regulatory bodies and the media where he alleged fundamental failings in the operation of the DPS including serious allegations of professional incompetence, use of improper medical practices, attempts to cover up wrongdoing and in some cases he named and criticised specific individuals.’

Full Story

3PB, 2nd March 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Court of Appeal upholds no order for costs decision in housing case where claimant withdrew proceedings after being given new accommodation – Local Government Lawyer

Posted March 17th, 2020 in causation, costs, housing, judicial review, news by sally

‘A judge was entitled to conclude that the appropriate course was to make no order for costs in a housing case where legal proceedings were withdrawn because the claimant had obtained all the relief she was seeking, the Court of Appeal has found.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 16th March 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

COA Considers Causation & the Reach of s.43G in Jesudason v Alder Hey Childrens NHS Foundation Trust – Old Square Chambers

Posted February 11th, 2020 in causation, disclosure, news, victimisation, whistleblowers by sally

‘Mr Jesudason was a consultant paediatric surgeon for the Trust. Between 2009 and 2014, he made a number of allegations to the Trust, several regulatory bodies and other third parties, including the media. These allegations related to serious failures and wrongdoing in the operation of his Department at the Trust. Following the termination of his employment, Mr Jesudason brought claims of whistleblowing. His claims were dismissed by the ET and the EAT. Giving the sole judgment in the Court of Appeal, Sir Patrick Elias dismissed Mr Jesudason’s appeal.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 4th February 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

Sanderson v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation [2020] EWHC 20 (QB) – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted February 6th, 2020 in birth, causation, hospitals, news, personal injuries by sally

‘The Claimant suffered from moderately severe cerebral palsy resulting from a short period acute brain hypoxia in the minutes preceding her delivery in February 2002.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 27th January 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Sanderson v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation [2020] EWHC 20 (QB). – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted January 28th, 2020 in birth, causation, negligence, news, personal injuries by sally

‘The Claimant suffered from moderately severe cerebral palsy resulting from a short period acute brain hypoxia in the minutes preceding her delivery in February 2002.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 27th January 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

What evidence does the adjudicator find useful when considering delay? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted January 21st, 2020 in causation, construction industry, delay, news by sally

‘White Constructions, a developer, engaged a sewer designer (“IWS”) and water servicing coordinator (“SWC”) to design a sewerage solution that complied with New South Wales regulations. The initial design was rejected by the relevant authorities, but a second design was later submitted and accepted. Subsequently, White Constructions brought proceedings against IWS and SWC for failing to produce a sewer design acceptable to the relevant authority within a reasonable time period, submitting that this failure caused delay to the completion of the project and thereby led to significant additional costs. At trial, the parties were each permitted to engage their own experts to assess the alleged delay. White Construction’s expert used an ‘as planned versus as-built windows analysis’, stipulating that there had been a serious delay of 240 days. The Defendants’ expert used a ‘collapsed as-built (or “but-for”) analysis’, demonstrating that there had been, at most, a 19-day delay. However, neither evidences were used by the Court because the they seen as not being appropriate for the case. Instead, the Court appointed a third expert whose evidence was preferred. The Court found that no breach had been established and so damages were not awarded.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 16th January 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Adverse Inferences Drawn From Failure to Adduce Noise Surveys: Brian MacKenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted December 10th, 2019 in causation, evidence, industrial injuries, news, noise by sally

‘The Claimant brought a claim for noise induced hearing loss (“NIHL”) which he alleged was caused by exposure to excessive levels of noise in the course of his employment with the First Defendant at the Second Defendant’s premises at various times between 1963 -1976. ‘

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 5th December 2019

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Prorogation: Constitutional Principle and Law, Fact and Causation – Oxford Human Rights Hub

‘The Prime Minister’s recent announcement that Parliament would be prorogued, thereby severely curtailing the opportunity for parliamentary debate, raises important issues of constitutional principle and law, and also issues concerning fact and causation. They are examined in turn.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 31st August 2019

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

You Can’t Always Get What You Want: Defending Applications For Interim Payments – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted August 29th, 2019 in causation, contribution, negligence, news by sally

‘Interim payment applications are often the battleground for pre-trial skirmishes, the warm-up before the main event. Recent cases have identified some successful arguments made by defendants in disputed IP applications and particularly the evidence needed by a defendant if they wish to successfully challenge an application.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 8th August 2019

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Linking it all together: Russell v PSP [2019] – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted August 29th, 2019 in causation, construction industry, negligence, news, tenders by sally

‘Every professional negligence lawyer knows that establishing the necessary causative link between a professional’s breach of duty and the loss suffered by the client can be the most difficult aspect of any claim. That can prove even more problematic in construction professional negligence cases, in particular those involving costs “overrun”, both because of the broader range of alternative hypotheticals and the number of other professionals involved with the project.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 6th August 2019

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Ep 83: Scope of Duty and Causation: Chester v Afshar revisited – Part 2 – Law Pod UK

Posted June 13th, 2019 in causation, doctors, duty of care, negligence, news by sally

‘In this episode we are bringing the second of two highlights from the recent one crown office row’s seminar – Scope of Duty and Causation: Chester v Afshar revisited. Dominic Ruck Keene dicusses the effects of the case.’

Full Story

Law Pod UK, 10th June 2019

Source: audioboom.com

Ep 82: Scope of Duty and Causation: Chester v Afshar revisited – Part 1 – Law Pod UK

Posted June 13th, 2019 in causation, doctors, duty of care, negligence, news by sally

‘In this episode we are bringing the first of two highlights from the recent 1COR seminar – Scope of Duty and Causation: Chester v Afshar revisited. We hear from Jonathan Metzer as he gives his interpretation of the case.’

Full Story

Law Pod UK, 10th June 2019

Source: audioboom.com

High Court considers causation in clinical negligence – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted May 23rd, 2019 in causation, damages, delay, doctors, negligence, news, statutory duty by tracey

‘Pomphrey v Secretary of State for Health and Anor [2019] 4 WLUK 483. This case concerned an alleged failure to diagnose compression of nerve roots leading to cauda equina and alleged delay in operating urgently. It raises an important issue in relation to causation and the applicability of the famous decision of Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd May 2019

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Ep 79: Causation in Inquests – Christopher Mellor – Law Pod UK

Posted May 21st, 2019 in causation, coroners, inquests, news by sally

‘Emma-Louise Fenelon talks to Christopher Mellor about causation in inquests and the findings in R(Chidlow) v HMS Coroner for Blackpool and Fylde [2019] EWHC 581 (Admin).’

Full Story

Law Pod UK, 20th May 2019

Source: audioboom.com

Coronial Causation – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted March 22nd, 2019 in causation, inquests, news by tracey

‘The Divisional Court in R (Chidlow) v HM Senior Coroner for Blackpool [2019] EWHC 581 has given a concise and authoritative judgment reiterating and summarising the current common law concerning causation in inquests. Given the ever increasing importance of inquests and their conclusions as preliminaries to civil litigation, as well the growing number of inquests being held into historical deaths, the judgment will doubtless be frequently cited over the coming months and years.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 18th March 2019

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Case Comment: Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5 – UKSC Blog

‘Rory Thomson, a senior associate in the disputes team at CMS, comments on the judgment of the UK Supreme Court in the case of Perry v Raleys Solicitors, which was handed down on 13 February 2019. The judgment is a useful affirmation and clarification of the law on the assessment of causation and loss in professional negligence cases.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 18th February 2019

Source: ukscblog.com

New Judgment: Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5 – UKSC Blog

‘Considers liability and damages where the appellant solicitor negligently failed to advise a client of a potential claim against a third party. Held: allowing the appeal, loss of chance damages have been developed by the courts to deal with the difficulties arising from the assessment of counter-factual and future events. In both types of situation, the courts at times depart from the ordinary burden on a claimant to prove the facts required for a successful claim on the balance of probabilities. However, this does not mean that the basic requirement that a negligence claim requires proof that loss has been caused by the breach of duty is abandoned. Applying this approach, the respondent needed to prove that, properly advised, he would have made a claim within time. Further, the judge was correct to impose the additional requirement of the claim having to be an honest claim.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 13th February 2019

Source: ukscblog.com