Category: causation

John v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust – WLR Daily

Posted March 7th, 2016 in causation, contribution, damages, delay, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by tracey

John v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: [2016] EWHC 407 (QB)

‘The claimant suffered a head injury and was taken to a hospital managed by the defendant. A CT scan was performed some six hours after his admission and he was transferred to another hospital where he underwent surgery. He was left with cognitive and neuropsychological deficits. He claimed damages in negligence against the defendant contending, inter alia, that the defendant’s negligent delay in undertaking the CT scan had resulted in a period of raised intra-cranial pressure which had caused or materially contributed to his brain damage. The defendant contended that only if the claimant could establish that damaging raised intra-cranial pressure caused by the defendant’s negligence had caused his brain injury that, applying the classic “but for” test of causation, he could recover as against the defendant, and that it was insufficient to establish “material contribution”.’

WLR Daily, 16th March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Appeal court: profits from sale of ship should be treated as mitigation of loss from breach of contract – OUT-LAW.com

Posted January 8th, 2016 in causation, charterparties, contracts, economic loss, news, shipping law by tracey

‘A High Court judge “overcomplicated matters” by attempting to develop a set of principles governing whether the innocent party to a breach of contract should have its award of damages reduced to reflect a benefit it obtained from that breach of contract, an expert has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 8th January 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Wellesley v Withers: A significant change in the analysis of remoteness of damage – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted December 9th, 2015 in causation, contracts, drafting, limited liability partnerships, negligence, news by sally

‘In Wellesley Partners LLP v Withers LLP [2015] EWCA Civ 1146 the Court of Appeal made an important change to the law of causation. From now onwards, the contractual approach causation shall apply instead of the tortious principles of remoteness in cases of concurrent liability. The effect of this case will be to materially change causation analyses in professional negligence matters, albeit the conclusion (as demonstrated in the Wellesley case itself) through the two analytical frameworks may well be identical.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd December 2015

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

High Court: solicitors had duty to advise on commercial element of deal – Legal Futures

Posted July 13th, 2015 in causation, competition, covenants, negligence, news, restraint of trade, solicitors by tracey

‘The High Court has dismissed a claim against a firm of solicitors, despite finding it negligent in failing to raise the absence of a covenant in restraint of competition during the purchase of a commercial property.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 13th July 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

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

Posted April 30th, 2015 in accidents, appeals, causation, damages, ex turpi causa, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by sally

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

“No proper justification” for challenge based on draft judgment – Litigation Futures

Posted January 14th, 2015 in accountants, causation, judgments, negligence, news, taxation by tracey

‘There was “no proper justification” for a claimant seeking to reopen an issue based on the circulation of a draft judgment, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 13th January 2015

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Multiple Defendants: Who to sue? – Cloisters

Posted November 18th, 2014 in causation, costs, joint liability, news, prosecutions, vicarious liability by sally

‘Claims involving multiple defendants are often complex in terms of the facts, the law and the expert medical evidence. They are claims that we all have some experience of, and the issues involved have no doubt troubled us all to a greater or lesser degree at times.’

Full story

Cloisters, 3rd October 2014

Source: www.cloisters.com

Novoship (UK) Ltd and others v Nikitin and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 9th, 2014 in bribery, causation, charterparties, debts, fiduciary duty, interest, law reports by sally

Novoship (UK) Ltd and others v Nikitin and others [2014] EWCA 908; [2014] WLR (D) 297

‘The remedy of an account of profits was available against one who dishonestly assisted a fiduciary to breach his fiduciary obligations, even if that breach did not involve a misapplication of trust property.

WLR Daily, 4th July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

The English law of causation and the passing-on defence – Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers

Posted June 30th, 2014 in causation, competition, damages, defences, news by sally

‘One of the big questions of English competition law is whether there is such a thing as a “passing-on defence” – – i.e. whether the damages suffered by a purchaser of a cartelized product are reduced or mitigated if he “passes on” some of the overcharge to his own customers. Two follow-on damages actions were due to be heard this term, arising out of the synthetic rubber cartel and the gas insulated switchgear cartel, both of which raised the question of passing-on but both of which have now settled.’

Full story

Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 30th June 2014

Source: www.competitionbulletin.com

Santander UK Plc v RA Legal Solicitors: A shift in balance in favour of lenders? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 8th, 2014 in banking, breach of trust, causation, law firms, news, solicitors, trusts by sally

‘Section 61 of the Trustee Act 1925 gives the court power to relieve from liability a trustee who has committed a breach of trust, if he: (i) acted honestly and reasonably; and (ii) ought fairly to be excused for the breach.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 13th March 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Role of Equity in Mistaken Transactions – Speech by the Chancellor of the High Court

Posted November 25th, 2013 in causation, contracts, equity, mistake, rectification, restitution, speeches, trusts by tracey

‘Role of Equity in Mistaken Transactions – Speech by the Chancellor of the High Court. ACTAPS lecture 2013, delivered 20th November 2013.’

Full speech

Judiciary of England and Wales, 21st November 2013

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

Snakes & ladders – New Law Journal

Posted June 28th, 2013 in appeals, causation, ex turpi causa, joint enterprise, negligence, news, personal injuries, proportionality by tracey

“The press would have us believe that criminals can do what they like and then merrily sue all and sundry for the unfortunate consequences of those actions. Sadly for tabloid journalists this is simply not true as the Court of Appeal recently remind us in Joyce v O’Brien [2012] EWHC 1324 (QB), [2012] All ER (D) 202 (May). The case is a useful reminder of the rule often shortened to “ex turpi”, namely that the court will not allow a party to profit from a loss arising from that party’s own criminal or immoral activity.”

Full story

New Law Journal, 27th June 2013

Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk

Joyce v O’Brien and another – WLR Daily

Posted May 20th, 2013 in causation, ex turpi causa, joint enterprise, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by sally

Joyce v O’Brien and another [2013] EWCA Civ 546; [2013] WLR (D) 182

“Where the character of a joint criminal enterprise was such that it was foreseeable that a party or parties might be subject to unusual or increased risks of harm as a consequence of the activities of the parties in pursuance of their criminal objectives, and the risk materialised, the harm could properly be said to have been caused by the criminal act of the party suffering it even if it resulted from the negligent or intentional act of another party to the criminal enterprise. Therefore, in such circumstances the principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio would provide the negligent party with a defence to a claim for negligence by the injured party.”

WLR Daily, 17th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Milton Keynes Borough Council v Nulty, decd and others – WLR Daily

Posted January 28th, 2013 in appeals, burden of proof, causation, fire, insurance, law reports, negligence by sally

Milton Keynes Borough Council v Nulty, decd and others [2013] EWCA Civ 15; [2013] WLR (D) 25

“There was no rule of law that if the only other possible causes of an event were very much less likely than one suggested means of causation, that became the probable cause; the court had to be satisfied on rational and objective grounds that the case for believing that the suggested means of causation occurred was stronger than the case for not so believing.”

WLR Daily, 24th January 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Thames Water Utilities Ltd v Transport for London – WLR Daily

Posted January 23rd, 2013 in causation, law reports, negligence, nuisance, statutory duty, utilities by sally

Thames Water Utilities Ltd v Transport for London [2013] WLR (D) 15

“On the plain construction of regulation 19 of the Traffic Management Permit Scheme (England) Regulations 2007 a statutory undertaker could not avoid a criminal sanction where a person contracted to act on its behalf to undertake specified works in a specified street did so without a permit.”

WLR Daily, 17th January 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Drawing the Fault Line: Multiple Tortfeasors and Intervening Acts – Cloisters

Posted December 4th, 2012 in assault, causation, negligence, news, personal injuries, prosecutions, third parties by sally

“It is not uncommon for a potential personal injury or clinical negligence claimant to have been subjected to a series of events that may all be linked to causation of his injury – we’ve all met the unfortunate client for whom nothing seems to go right. Sometimes the events will be the acts of third parties, which
may or may not be tortious; at other times, the individual’s own actions may have played a part in the causation of his injuries. The third party acts may involve personal injury, or clinical negligence, or even assault. In such circumstances, there may be multiple potential defendants to any legal claim
and serious thought needs to be given to the question of whom to claim against, to avoid potential adverse costs consequences from bringing proceedings against the wrong, or too many, defendant(s) or – worse – failing to sue the tortfeasor ultimately found to be primarily or even solely responsible for the claimant’s losses.”

Full story (PDF)

Cloisters, November 2012

Source: www.cloisters.com

Gore v Stannard (trading as Wyvern Tyres) – WLR Daily

Posted October 11th, 2012 in appeals, causation, fire, insurance, law reports, strict liability by sally

Gore v Stannard (trading as Wyvern Tyres) [2012] EWCA Civ 1248; [2012] WLR (D) 266

“Where a party brought a claim relying on the strict liability rule under Rylands v Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330, the claim being founded on an outbreak of fire said to be caused by another party having brought a ‘thing’ on to his land which then ‘escaped’, close attention would have to be given to the precise ‘thing’ which was said to have ‘escaped’ when analysing whether the principles relied on in fact applied. It remained a moot point whether there was any room for the classic principles to be reformulated in fire cases.”

WLR Daily, 4th October 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Wright v Cambridge Medical Group (a partnership) – WLR daily

Posted June 13th, 2011 in causation, delay, doctors, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by tracey

Wright v Cambridge Medical Group (a partnership) [2011] EWCA Civ 669;  [2011] WLR (D)  189

“General practitioners were liable in negligence for the late referral of an infant to hospital where, if she had received effective treatment in time, she would probably have made a full recovery from an infection which in fact caused permanent damage to her hip.”

WLR Daily, 9th June 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd; Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council – WLR daily

Posted March 11th, 2011 in asbestos, causation, law reports, negligence, personal injuries by sally
“The special rule attributing causation to multiple defendants in mesothelioma cases also applied to a single defendant who, in breach of duty, exposed a victim to asbestos dust, where her only other known exposure was low level asbestos fibres in the general atmosphere and where she subsequently contracted the disease.”
WLR Daily, 10th March 2011
 
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted February 4th, 2011 in causation, consumer protection, law reports, unfair commercial practices by sally

Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and others [2011] EWHC 106 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 34

“For the purposes of applying the causation test in regulations 5 and 6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 the combined effect of all relevant misleading acts and omissions had first to be ascertained, and then subjected to the test whether, taken in the aggregate, it would probably cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision which he would not otherwise have taken.”

WLR Daily, 3rd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.