‘An NHS whistleblower who was unfairly sacked after exposing concerns about patient safety has been awarded £1.22m in damages by a hospital trust.’
The Guardian, 4th February 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A boy with a rare sleeping illness caused by a swine flu vaccine has won £120,000 in damages.’
BBC News, 3rd February 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘It will become easier for victims of competition law breaches to claim compensation when the EU Damages Directive comes into force in December.’
OUT-LAW.com, 29th January 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Cardiff-based Capital Law has today launched a £50m fund – backed by a hedge fund – to help its clients pursue litigation, in a first for a law firm.’
Legal Futures, 1st February 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has reduced by almost two-thirds the balance awarded to the seller of a law firm by the High Court, after ruling that – among other things – the trial judge had been wrong not to award the buyer damages for misrepresentation of the firm’s finances.’
Legal Futures, 29th January 2016
Source: wwww.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A claimant who receives less at stage 3 of the RTA protocol than was offered at stage 2 has to reimburse the difference, a circuit judge has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 21st January 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Sports Direct has “abused” the legal system, according to a high court judge presiding over the embattled retailer’s bitter legal battle with Rangers football club.’
The Guardian, 19th January 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Litigants in person (LiPs) can benefit from the ‘without prejudice’ rule even if they do not know what it means, the Court of Appeal has made clear.’
Litigation Futures, 19th January 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Supreme Court has provided long awaited clarification of the law on penalty clauses and liquidated damages, upholding the “penalty rule” but further limiting its utility in a commercial setting. In the adjoined appeals of Cavendish Square Holding v Talal El Makdessi and ParkingEye Limited v Beavis the Supreme Court created a new authority for consideration of the penalty rule doctrine, termed by Lordships Neuberger and Sumption to be “an ancient, haphazardly constructed edifice which has not weathered well”.’
RPC Built Environment, 6th January 2016
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
Cook v Virgin Media Ltd; McNeil v Tesco plc [2015] EWCA Civ 1287; [2015] WLR (D) 538
‘The English court had power to apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens in a purely domestic context, exercising the court’s wide general case management powers in CPR rr 3.1(2)(m) and 3.3, and therefore could strike out or stay proceedings brought in England where Scotland was the natural and more appropriate forum.’
WLR Daily, 14th December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘It is panto season, and everyone loves a good villain. This Christmas’ Wicked Stepmother is the Mirror Group who, when asking ‘Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who is the most liable of them all?’ has received the answer from the Court of Appeal that they are and must pay the consequences.’
Panopticon, 17th December 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘It has been a mixed day for the media’s entanglements with the judiciary. Chris Knight posted earlier today about the unhappy outcome for Mirror Group Newspapers before the Court of Appeal in the Gulati privacy damages litigation arising from phone-hacking. News Group Newspapers, however – together with Sun journalist claims Tom Newton Dunn, Anthony France and Craig Woodehouse – had a happier outcome in another case about telephone privacy, though this time with the media as victim rather than perpetrator of the interference.’
Panopticon, 17th December 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘Mirror Group Newspapers has lost its appeal over damages paid to eight victims of phone hacking.’
BBC News, 17th December 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Moorjani v Durban Estates Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1152; [2015] WLR (D) 509
‘In a case in which a residential tenant claimed to have suffered loss arising from the landlord’s breach of its repairing and insuring obligations, which had caused disrepair to his flat, the loss lay in the impairment of the amenity value of the tenant’s proprietary interest in the flat, and discomfort, inconvenience and distress were only symptoms.’
WLR Daily, 4th December 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The tort of intentional infliction of harm would seem to encapsulate a basic moral principle – that if you injure someone intentionally and without just cause or excuse, then you should be liable for the commission of a tort – in addition to any crime that you commit. Occasionally, judges have held that there is such a principle, which is of general application: eg, Bowen LJ in Mogul Steamship v McGregor Gow & Co (1889). While this principle is now uncontroversial in cases of the intended infliction of physical harm (see Bird v Holbrook [1828]), the position has been unclear in so far as it concerns the causation of psychiatric harm. The most important case on intended infliction of psychiatric harm (IIPH) was Wilkinson v Downton (1897). But that case has long been doubted because the defendant had been playing a practical joke upon the claimant, telling her that her husband had been involved in an accident and was lying ‘smashed up’ at Leytonstone. Wright J could find no actual intention to harm, but held that an imputed intention to harm was sufficient to create liability.’
OUP Blog, 14th December 2015
Source: www.blog.oup.com
‘Perhaps illustrating the need for the Court of Appeal to deliver the judgment in Moorjani (see preceding post), the December 2015 issue of Legal Action has Beatrice Prevatt’s excellent annual “housing repairs update”. We have covered many of the cases noted in the update already, but there are some county court cases unreported elsewhere, remarkably this time including some Councils taking cases to trial. As ever, our thanks to Beatrice Prevatt and Legal Action.’
Nearly Legal, 13th December 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘It began in December 2005 when the Metropolitan police started an investigation into the hacking of Prince William’s phone and has ended exactly 10 years later. In the intervening period, hundreds lost their jobs and many more reputations were both shredded and made, mainly on the legal benches.’
The Guardian, 11th December 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘We are now bombarded with case reports by email and over the Internet. The reporting of 1st instance quantum decisions used to be a comparative rarity before 1992 and the PIQR. Even then there was a time lag in publication and many decisions were never covered. On one level, we are immensely fortunate now to be able to discern how the best counsel and 1st instance judges set about their respective tasks in serious personal injuries litigation; but with that opportunity comes the obligation on the serious practitioner to take the time really to get to grips with the lengthy judgments. It is not easy. This paper, evolving since the autumn of 2007, is an exercise in the on-going fulfilment of that obligation.’
Byrom Chambers, 7th December 2015
Source: www.byromstreet.com
‘The common law defence of tender before claim is a defence that, before the claimant commenced court proceedings, the defendant had unconditionally offered the amount due to the claimant.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 30th November 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024