‘Chris Packham said he has been vindicated after a judge found that he had been subjected to an online ideological campaign, accusing him of fraud and dishonesty, before awarding him £90,000 in libel damages.’
The Guardian, 25th May 2023
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Tesco has undervalued the damage it did to the Lidl brand by its use of a blue and yellow logo to promote prices promotions, the High Court heard yesterday.’
Law Society's Gazette, 23rd May 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has struck out a representative action brought on behalf of 1.6m people who claimed Google and DeepMind Technologies misused their medical records.’
Legal Futures, 22nd May 2023
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘An Essex couple have spent 10 months seeking compensation after 18 escaped water buffaloes stampeded through their garden, with eight of them taking a morning dip in their new swimming pool.’
The Guardian, 20th May 2023
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The law of malicious falsehood aims to protect economic interests. Malicious falsehood claims are sometimes made in tandem with, or as an alternative to, defamation claims.’
OUT-LAW.com, 12th May 2023
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘A judge has dismissed a claim that national firm Slater and Gordon was passed confidential information which caused it to chop £63m off the price of an acquisition.’
Law Society's Gazette, 15th May 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Competition Appeal Tribunal is set to hear arguments today on a complex EU law issue worth billions of pounds in proceedings against credit card providers, Mastercard and Visa.’
Law Society's Gazette, 24th April 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Ministry of Justice has rejected broadening eligibility for bereavement damages despite accusations the current limits are outdated and unfair.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th April 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In what is becoming something of a pattern, the Rules committee have come along to clear up the anomaly resulting from the decisions in the Appellate courts, this time in Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654; [2018] 1 WLR 6137 and Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43; [2021] 1 WLR 5132.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 16th March 2023
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘A topic close to my (legal) heart, and one upon which I have been known to speak unprompted at some length, is the correct approach to fact-finding where several possible causes, or causal mechanisms, are suggested for the damage under investigation: a common feature of clinical negligence (and, more widely, personal injury) litigation.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 29th March 2023
Source: ropewalk.co.uk
‘On 3 March 2023, Johnson J handed down judgment in relation to former marine Mr Barry’s claim that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) caused his noise-induced hearing loss. It is the first time judicial guidance has been expressly given on the reduction factors (other than mortality) since the revised guidance in the 8th edition of the Ogden tables were published in July 2020.’
3PB, March 2023
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘In the recent case of Mundy v TUI UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 385 (Ch), the High Court (Collins Rice J) provided helpful clarification about when Part 36 offers deal with an apportionment of liability.’
Pump Court Chambers, 27th March 2023
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
‘Czernuska is the latest of a series of judgments determining whether injuries sustained during competitive sporting fixtures were caused by negligence. This blog considers the general principles and themes on liability that emerge from this kind of litigation by looking at Czernuska v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB), Fulham Football Club v Jones [2022] EWHC 1108 (QB) and Tylicki v Gibbons [2021] EWHC 3470 (QB).’
12 King's Bench Walk, 23rd March 2023
Source: www.12kbw.co.uk
‘More than 900 bereaved family members, survivors and local people who were affected by the devastating Grenfell Tower fire have agreed on a settlement of their civil claims arising from the blaze.’
The Guardian, 11th April 2023
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Currently set off of a defendant’s costs against a claimant’s costs is precluded where it exceeds the monetary cap reflecting the total of any orders for damages and interest made in a claimant’s favour (Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43). Moreover, a defendant can only enforce their costs against damages and interest ordered in a claimant’s favour, i.e. not against a settlement made in the claimant’s favour (Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654).’
3PB, March 2023
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘In Raspin v Taylor [2022] EWCA Civ 1613 the Court of Appeal re-affirmed the need for the limited use of expert reconstruction evidence in road traffic claims. The Court had originally advised upon restriction of such evidence in the case of Liddell v Middleton [1996] P.I.Q.R P36. Needless to say, over the next 25 years adherence to such guidance was not followed by the parties nor enforced by the lower courts on case management.’
39 Essex Chambers, 14th March 2023
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Briggs v Drylined Homes Ltd [2023] EWHC 382 (KB) (judgment here) concerned a claim by the widow of Mr Brian Briggs, who died in 2017 after contracting mesothelioma. The Claimant brought a claim against one of her husband’s former employers, Drylined Homes Ltd (“DHL”). DHL had engaged Mr Briggs between approximately 1975 and 1979 to carry out “drylining”, namely putting up plasterboards during house construction.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 1st March 2023
Source: ropewalk.co.uk
‘In our spring 2023 insurance law review we look at cases across a range of areas with no standout theme. We review cases ranging from Covid 19 business interruption claims to recovery of professional fees; from reservation of rights to subrogation; from insurable interest to damages for late payment. We look at cases on the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Acts 1930 and 2010, aggregation and exclusion clauses. And we note the continuing lack of significant case law on presentation of risk under the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 and the Insurance Act 2015.’
4 New Square, 28th March 2023
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘G4S’s running of the prison failed to meet the standards of public service required, such that HMP Birmingham was put in special measures, and its running was taken over by the Ministry of Justice. The Chief Inspector of Prisons at the time, Peter Clarke, invoked the Urgent Notification process in respect of the prison.’
Garden Court Chambers, 23rd March 2023
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2023