What if it is not just my fault? A whistle stop guide to making a contribution claim – Mills & Reeve

‘In principle, a claim can be made against one responsible party for all losses suffered, even when other parties were involved (e.g. a claim against solicitors when a barrister may have also provided advice) but what if a claim is made against you and you aren’t the only one to blame?’

Full Story

Mills & Reeve, 26th July 2022

Source: www.mills-reeve.com

Drunkenness no basis for avoiding contributory negligence, Court of Appeal rules – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted November 18th, 2021 in accidents, alcohol abuse, contribution, negligence, news, road traffic by tracey

‘The drunkenness of a passenger seeking damages for injuries sustained in a car crash “will not avoid a finding of contributory negligence” where the claimant should have appreciated that the driver was too drunk to drive safely, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 16th November 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Personal Injury Newsletter – Exchange Chambers

‘In the February 2021 edition of the personal injury newsletter:

Tactical Management: Taking charge for claimants
As a claimant-only advocate, Bill Braithwaite QC explains exactly why he believes that lawyers who represent severely injured claimants should understand the importance of having complete control over the recovery, rehabilitation and litigation process.

Child’s Play: Gul v Mcdonagh ((2021) Ewhc 97)
Will Waldron QC considers the case of Gul v Mcdonagh ((2021) Ewhc 97), amongst others, in relation to the often tricky question of whether to concede some finding of contributory negligence in a case involving a child.

Second bite of the cherry? Abuse of process post-Poku
In this article, Helen Rutherford covers abuse of process in credit hire cases following Isaac Osei-Wusu Poku v Abedin.

Another Hurdle for Nervous Shock Claims
In Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310, the House of Lords established 4 hurdles which a secondary victim must overcome in order to establish liability. Although a number of cases have tested the limits of these hurdles, an issue which has never previously been considered is whether a secondary victim must prove that his shock resulted from an appreciation that the primary victim is a loved one who had been or might have been involved in the incident. David Knifton QC considers this issue, with reference to the case of Young v Downey.’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, February 2021

Source: lexlinks.exchangechambers.co.uk

Fixed Costs: The Impact of Contributory Negligence on Trial Advocacy Fees – No. 5 Chambers

Posted June 2nd, 2020 in civil procedure rules, contribution, costs, negligence, news, road traffic by sally

‘CPR 45.29C sets out the amount of fixed costs payable in Fast Track claims where a claim no longer continues under the RTA Protocol. Where a claim is disposed of at trial, costs of £2,655.00 are payable, alongside 20% of the damages agreed or awarded and the relevant trial advocacy fee. The protocol for EL/PL claims works in a similar way. It is trite that where the claim settles at Court on the day listed for trial, the advocacy fee is still payable.’

Full Story

No. 5 Chambers, 18th May 2020

Source: www.no5.com

Is Speeding a Defence? Motorbikes and Contributory Negligence – Zenith PI Blog

Posted September 2nd, 2019 in contribution, defences, motorcycles, news, personal injuries by sally

‘In the majority of road traffic based personal injury claims, speed is often raised as an allegation of negligence. Witness statements abound with comments that the other driver ‘must’ve been speeding’ and even, my personal favourite, that ‘they sounded like they were speeding’. To what extent though does the speed of the other driver absolve the negligent driver? The High Court has considered this question in a recent case involving a motorcyclist, a side road and bank holiday driving.’

Full Story

Zenith PI Blog, 30th August 2019

Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com

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

‘With great power comes great responsibility’ – contributory negligence post-Montgomery – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted August 22nd, 2019 in birth, contribution, doctors, hospitals, medical treatment, negligence, news by sally

‘Regardless of whether one attributes this famous quote to Voltaire or Spider-Man, the sentiment is the same. Power and responsibility should be in equilibrium. More power than responsibility leads to decision-making with little concern for the consequences and more responsibility than power leads to excessive caution. This article argues that there is now a disequilibrium in the NHS, which is the root cause for defensive medical practice and the growing NHS litigation bill.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 21st August 2019

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Haider Abdullah v Credit Suisse – Blackstone Chambers

Posted December 8th, 2017 in banking, contribution, markets, negligence, news by sally

‘The Commercial Court (Andrew Baker J) has given judgment in favour of the Claimants in their action for damages against Credit Suisse under s.138D of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).’

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 27th November 2017

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

No legal barriers to social investment, but pension schemes still not investing – Law Commission

Posted June 23rd, 2017 in contribution, Law Commission, news, pensions, press releases, reports by tracey

‘There are no legal or regulatory barriers to pension schemes making social investments, according to a new report by the Law Commission.’

Full Story

Law Commission, 23rd June 2017

Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk

Kazakhstan Kagazy plc and others v Zhunus and others – WLR Daily

Posted October 31st, 2016 in civil procedure rules, contribution, fraud, freezing injunctions, law reports by sally

Kazakhstan Kagazy plc and others v Zhunus and others [2016] EWCA Civ 1036

‘The claimants were a group of companies. The first and second defendants had been, respectively, the chairman of the board and the chief executive officer of the first and second claimants. The third defendant had been the finance director of the second claimant. The claimants issued proceedings alleging, inter alia, that the defendants had dishonestly caused the claimant companies to enter into transactions in which large sums of money were paid to entities owned or controlled by the defendants and which had caused the claimants to incur substantial financial losses. All three defendants served defences denying fraud and dishonesty or that they had personally benefitted from the transactions. Subsequently, the first defendant reached a settlement of the claim against him with the claimants. The second and third defendants applied for permission pursuant to CPR r 20.6(2)(b) to bring a contribution claim against the first defendant, no such claim having been filed and served when they served their defence. The second defendant further sought a worldwide freezing order against the first defendant. The judge refused the applications, holding that (i) the claim for contribution was bound to fail because the draft contribution notice sought to be relied upon by the second and third defendants did not advance a case of actual fraud or wrongdoing by the first defendant and, following the their settlement agreement with the first defendant, no such case was being advanced by the claimants which the second and third defendants could adopt as an alternative to their primary position that they had acted honestly; and (ii) the court could only grant a freezing injunction once the applicant had an accrued cause of action, which, in the context of a claim for contribution, was once the contribution notice had been filed and served under CPR r 20.6(2).’

WLR Daily, 26th October 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Out of time but not out of options: Court of Appeal clarify how to deal with limitation defences in contribution claims in WH Newson v IMI – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted August 25th, 2016 in appeals, contribution, news, time limits by sally

‘I don’t know if this has also been your experience, but for some reason the workings of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (the Act) always seems to cause consternation.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 18th August 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

The Child in the Road Part 2 – Zenith PI Blog

‘Six months ago I discussed at some length the issues arising from the decision of the Supreme Court in Jackson v Murray [2015] PIQR P249. More recently in Sabir v Osei-Kwabena [2016] PIQR Q56, the problem cropped up again, this time in the Court of Appeal.’

Full story

Zenith PI, 7th March 2016

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

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

Wrongful trading: A tale of Robin Hood directors – New Square Chambers

Posted December 9th, 2015 in company directors, contribution, insolvency, news, winding up by sally

‘Applications for wrongful trading under s 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 are notoriously difficult. In Brooks v Armstrong [2015] EWHC 2289 (Ch), Registrar Jones ordered the former directors of Robin Hood Centre plc (the “Directors”) (the “Company”) to make a contribution to the Company’s assets under s 214. But the relatively small award serves as a cautionary reminder of the risks of s 214 applications for liquidators and directors alike.’

Full story

New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

The Child in the Road – Zenith PI Blog

Posted September 11th, 2015 in children, contribution, negligence, news, personal injuries, road traffic, Scotland by tracey

‘Jackson-v-Murray, which has been recently reported at [2005] PIQRP 249 deals directly or indirectly with three important issues: (1) the extent to which a higher court can interfere with an assessment of contributory negligence by the trial judge or by an appeal court; (2) the assessment of contributory negligence of children; (3) the assessment of the proportions of liability of drivers of vehicles and pedestrians with whom they come into collision.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 10th September 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

IMI plc and another v Delta Ltd (formerly Delta plc) and another – WLR Daily

Posted June 22nd, 2015 in civil justice, contribution, damages, law reports, limitations, time limits by tracey

IMI plc and another v Delta Ltd (formerly Delta plc) and another: [2015] EWHC 1676 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 262

‘On the true construction of the final proviso in section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 Part 20 the defendants in contribution proceedings were precluded from relying on a limitation defence pleaded against the claimants in the main proceedings.’

WLR Daily, 17th June 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In the matter of the Nortel Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies No 2 – Supreme Court

Posted July 29th, 2013 in administrators, contribution, debts, expenses, insolvency, law reports, pensions by sally

In the matter of the Nortel Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies; In the matter of the Lehman Companies No 2 [2013] UKSC 52 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 24th July 2013

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Contributory negligence claims and the use of child passenger restraints by Stuart Young – Sovereign Chambers

“Parents who fail to secure their children in appropriate child passenger seats can be found to be contributory negligent for any injuries that may be suffered by the child as a result of a road traffic accident, as confirmed by the recent Court of Appeal case Williams v Estate of Dayne Joshua Williams 2013.”

Full story

Sovereign Chambers, 1st July 2013

Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk

Pedestrians, contributory negligence and the current state of the law – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 8th, 2013 in contribution, news, personal injuries, road traffic by sally

“In a hearing of potential landmark significance, the Court of Appeal has given permission to the defendant in Probert v Moore [2012] EWHC 2324 (QB) to appeal against a finding that a 13 year old girl was not guilty of contributory negligence when struck by a car on an unlit country lane.”

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 6th February 2013

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Public sector cuts hit judges’ pensions – The Guardian

Posted February 6th, 2013 in bills, budgets, contribution, diversity, judiciary, news, pensions by sally

“Judges have been given figures showing how much they will lose when their tax-free pension allowances are cut in line with government reforms of public sector pay.”

Full story

The Guardian, 6th February 2013

Source: www.guardian.co.uk