Dove v HM Coroner for Teesside and Hartlepool [2021] EWHC 1738 (Admin) – Inquests and Inquiries Law Blog

‘In this article, Richard Ive discusses the case of Dove v HM Coroner for Teesside and Hartlepool [2021] EWHC 1738 (Admin), which raises important questions relating to Article 2 (the right to life). On 11 June 2021, the Administrative Court heard procedural arguments concerning a late application by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to join, as an interested party, a claim pursuant to the Coroners Act 1988 s.13 for a further inquest into the death of a highly vulnerable woman who took her own life shortly after all her Department of Work and Pensions (“DWP”) benefits were stopped. The Secretary of State’s application was successful, providing her with the opportunity to make submissions at the full hearing heard by the Divisional Court on 22 June 2021.’

Full Story

Inquests and Inquiries Law Blog, 29th June 2021

Source: inquestsandinquirieslawblog.com

Meadows v Khan in the Supreme Court: Scope of Duty in Clinical Negligence Claims – Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog

‘In Meadows v Khan [2021] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Ms Meadows’ appeal, finding that there was no principled basis for excluding a clinical negligence claim from the ambit of the ‘scope of duty principle’ in the tort of negligence. The judgment can be read here. This short blog looks at the majority’s reasoning.’

Full Story

Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 24th June 20201

Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk

Supreme Court Revisits Wrongful Birth Claims: an extended look — Robert Kellar QC and Owain Thomas QC – UK Human Rights Blog

‘In Khan v. Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 the Supreme Court has revisited the principles to be applied in “wrongful birth” claims: claims for the cost of bringing up a disabled child who would not have been born but for a doctor’s negligent medical advice/treatment. However, the judgment has implications beyond the world of clinical negligence litigation. The Supreme Court has taken the opportunity to clarify the components or ingredients of the tort negligence more generally. In particular, the Court has affirmed the importance of the “scope of duty” principle: a principle which limits the recoverability of damages wherever it applies. In particular, it is not sufficient for a claimant to establish that – with competent advice – they would have made a different decision about their treatment or care. They must also demonstrate that the particular harm that they have suffered fell within the scope of the defendant’s duty of care.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 24th June 2021

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Ombudsman criticises London borough over failures as corporate parent to former looked-after child who alleged abuse – Local Government Lawyer

‘The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has said the London Borough of Lewisham exposed a former looked after child to “significant harm” after it failed to address her claims of abuse while in foster care properly.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 22nd June 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Supreme Court clarifies duty test in Grant Thornton ruling – Law Society’s Gazette

‘The Supreme Court has backed a building society’s claim against its former auditor, in a ruling that provides a “more generous” test for the duty of care owed by professional advisers.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 18th June 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

High Court rejects ‘failure to remove’ abuse claim – UK Human Rights Blog

‘In a significant adverse judgment for child abuse claimants, DFX v Coventry City Council [2021] EWHC 1382 (QB), Mrs Justice Lambert rejected a claim brought by a number of claimants who alleged that the defendant council’s social services negligently delayed in instigating care proceedings and that had they been removed from the family home earlier they would have avoided serial abuse at the hands of their parents.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 14th June 2021

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Failure to remove claims and section 20 accommodation – Local Government Lawyer

‘A High Court Master has recently considered whether in ‘failure to remove’ cases where a child has been accommodated under section 20, the accommodation of the child gives rise to a duty of care by way of assumption of responsibility, even if other steps taken by the local authority do not do so. Paul Stagg analyses the ruling.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 11th June 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Duty of care for the acts of third parties – Law Society’s Gazette

‘In Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326, the Court of Appeal recently refused to dismiss a claim seeking damages from a UK-domiciled company following its sale of a ship to a third party, which arranged for its disposal in an unsafe manner. Although limited to arguability, it offers key insights into how duties could evolve into the consequences of corporates’ interactions with third parties.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 7th June 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Kent council fined after mother and son left to live in tent in pandemic – The Guardian

‘A council has been fined after it removed a homeless teenager and his mother from temporary housing during the pandemic, leaving them to sofa surf and live in a tent for two months.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd April 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Liability for abuse suffered by claimant place in private care home – Local Government Lawyer

‘Steven Ford QC analyses a ruling where, in the absence of fault, a local authority was not liable for sexual assaults committed by an employee of the private residential care home at which it placed the claimant. The relationship between the abusive employee and the placing authority was not akin to employment and the duty of care owed by the authority to the claimant was not non-delegable.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 16th April 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Universities ignoring rape culture warnings, say campaigners – The Guardian

‘Universities have ignored repeated warnings to tackle rape culture on campus, and left themselves exposed to lawsuits and reputational damage, according to lawyers and campaigners.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 15th April 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

‘Not a mini-trial’: Supreme Court explains the correct approach in jurisdiction challenges – Littleton Chambers

‘In The Spiliada [1987] AC 460, 465 Lord Templeman hoped that in jurisdiction disputes, “the judge will be allowed to study the evidence and refresh his memory of [the legal principles] in the quiet of his room without expense to the parties; that he will not be referred to other decisions on other facts; and that submissions will be measured in hours and not days.”‘

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 3rd March 2021

Source: littletonchambers.com

‘Failure to remove’ claims – the decision in HXA v Surrey County Council – Local Government Lawyer

‘Paul Stagg analyses an important decision this month on “failure to remove” claims and also summarises the other case law to date, before looking at pending cases and the likely way forward to the higher courts.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 26th February 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Okpabi & others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and another – Blackstone Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has given judgment in a high-profile appeal which raises important issues regarding the proper approach to jurisdictional challenges and the potential liability of parent companies in respect of damage caused by their subsidiaries.’

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 12th February 2021

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

New Judgment: Okpabi & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor [2021] UKSC 3 – UKSC Blog

‘Royal Dutch Shell Plc (‘RDS’) is the parent company of the Shell group of companies, incorporated in the UK. The Shell Petroleum Company of Nigeria Limited (‘SPDC’, the other Respondent) is an exploration and production company incorporated in Nigeria and is a subsidiary of RDS.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 12th February 2021

Source: ukscblog.com

Drawing the boundaries of the Quincecare duty in cases of fraud (Philipp v Barclays Bank plc) – Forum Chambers

Posted February 11th, 2021 in banking, chambers articles, duty of care, fraud, news by sally

‘Dispute Resolution analysis: Barclays Bank plc successfully applied for summary judgment against Mrs Philipp (the claimant) in respect of her claim that Barclays breached its so-called Quincecare duty in failing to prevent the fraudulent dissipation of £700,000 following an authorised push payment fraud, ie a fraud where the victim is induced by the fraudster to authorise a payment instruction to transfer funds to the fraudster. The High Court determined that the claimant’s claim had no real prospects of success since the claim was dependent upon an impermissible and unprincipled extension of the Quincecare duty to situations where a bank acts on a customer’s authorised payment instructions. The duty was held to be confined to situations where an agent of the customer sought to misappropriate funds as had been the case in previously decided cases such as Singularis Holdings Ltd (In Official Liquidation.’

Full Story

Forum Chambers, 2nd February 2021

Source: www.forumchambers.com

A duty of care – what does the new standard of proof in inquests mean? – 5SAH

‘On the 11th of July 2016 a prisoner Mr James Maughan was found dead in his prison cell having hanged himself. The investigation into the factual circumstances surrounding his death found that he had a history of mental health issues and had previously made threats of self-harm. The evening before his death he had been in an agitated state.’

Full Story

5SAH, 7th January 2021

Source: www.5sah.co.uk

Assetco v GT: A chink in SAAMCo’s armour? And a lost chance to sort out loss of a chance? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted November 19th, 2020 in accounts, auditors, damages, duty of care, loss of chance, negligence, news by sally

‘The recent decision of Assetco Plc v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 1151, in which judgment was handed down at the end of August, is well worth professional liability lawyers paying attention to whether they are predominantly claimant practitioners, defendant ones or, like me, act for either side. It is a useful illustration of the application of the SAAMCo principle/doctrine (and also contains an interesting, if not entirely novel, analysis regarding loss of a chance).’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 5th November 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Free School Meals and Governmental Responsibility — Dr Kirsteen Shields – UK Human Rights Blog

‘Questions around government responsibility for food systems, churning away during the Brexit debates, long ignored, sometimes derided, are meeting stark realities in the coronavirus pandemic. This week we are back to free school meals (FSM).’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd October 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Coronavirus: Amnesty demands immediate inquiry into care home residents ‘abandoned to die’ – The Independent

‘The human rights of older people have been violated in England’s care homes because of a series of “shockingly irresponsible” government decisions in response to the coronavirus pandemic, a report has found.’

Full Story

The Independent, 4th October 2020

Source: www.independent.co.uk