‘An optometrist who failed to spot symptoms of a life-threatening brain condition during a routine eye test of an eight-year-old who later died has been given a two-year suspended prison sentence.’
The Guardian, 26th August 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Today [16 August] Bilston Skips and Bikram Singh Mahli were found guilty of the manslaughter of 24-year-old site worker Jagpal Singh. Bikram Singh Mahli was sentenced to two years imprisonment suspended for a period of two years. The company, which is now in liquidation, was fined £600,000.
CPS News Brief, 16th August 2016
Source: http://blog.cps.gov.uk
‘Hundreds of compensation claims against British soldiers are likely to be abandoned after a controversial law firm accused of “hounding” troops announced that it is closing.’
Daily Telegraph, 15th August 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has ruled that an employer who negligently contributed 2.3% of the asbestos fibres in the lungs of an asbestosis sufferer should have to pay proportional compensation.’
Litigation Futures, 1st August 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The fact that a clinical negligence case had become a quantum-only dispute did not take it out of the costs management regime, meaning that the claimant’s failure to serve a costs budget restricted its recoverable costs to the court fees only, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 25th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has ruled that a claimant’s part 36 offer was a counter-offer, meaning that an earlier common law offer by the defendants no longer remained open for acceptance.’
Litigation futures, 15th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Government proposals for driverless cars could create a worrying principle in the law of negligence, a high-profile motoring solicitor has warned.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 16th July 2016
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘An optometrist who failed to spot an eye condition in a boy who later died has been found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.’
BBC News, 15th July 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Surrey and others v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1598 (QB)
‘Three separate cases involving clinical negligence litigation against the defendant hospital had been proceeding for several years prior to 1 April 2013. Under new legislation coming into force on 1 April 2013, a claimant entering into a conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) from that date would be unable to recover success fees and after the event (“ATE”) insurance premiums from the defendant if successful in the litigation. In each case the claim had initially been advanced with the benefit of legal aid, but in the month prior to 1 April 2013 the claimant’s solicitors, with the agreement of the claimant’s litigation friend, arranged for the legal aid certificate to be discharged and for the claim henceforth to be funded by a CFA to preserve the ability to recover the success fee and ATE premiums. In none of the cases was the litigation friend informed that the consequence would be the loss of the recognised 10% uplift on general damages. In each case the defendant challenged the successful claimant’s bill of costs, in so far as it sought to recover the success fee and the ATE premium, contending that the litigation friend’s decision was based on materially unreasonable advice (by reason of the omission to mention the 10% uplift) and that, since the burden was on the receiving party to establish that a cost was reasonably incurred and it was unknown what decision would have been made had proper advice been given, the doubt as to whether the additional costs were reasonably and proportionately incurred should be resolved in favour of the paying party. The costs judge in each case upheld the defendant’s challenge to those items, holding that the changed funding arrangements were not reasonable. Each claimant appealed, contending that the reasonableness of the decision to change funding had to be objectively assessed, so that the quality of any antecedent advice given to the claimants’ litigation friends was irrelevant.’
WLR Daily, 1st July 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
DB UK Bank Ltd (trading as DB Mortgages) v Jacobs Solicitors [2016 [EWHC] 1614 (Ch)
‘The claimant bank brought a claim for professional negligence against the defendant firm of solicitors. The claimant’s solicitors sent a letter to the defendant’s solicitors stating that they were accepting the defendant’s offer to settle contained in a “ without prejudice save as to costs” letter (“WPSAC letter”) and enclosing a draft Tomlin order. A series of without prejudice letters and conversations followed. The defendant’s solicitors wrote reiterating the terms of their offer of settlement. Subsequently, the claimant’s solicitors sent a without prejudice letter containing a CPR Pt 36 offer. The parties differed as to the effect of the claimant’s Part 36 offer on the defendant’s WPSAC letter. The defendant contended that the claimant’s Part 36 offer was a counteroffer and, in law, had the effect of rejecting its WPSAC letter so that thereafter, it was not open for acceptance.’
WLR Daily, 4th July 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘What can the recently re-launched Adjudication Scheme for Professional Negligence Claims offer parties and practitioners in this area? Those, and don’t worry you’re not alone, oblivious to its original launch as a pilot scheme in February 2015 may be part of the reason for its re-launch 15 months later. The original scheme apparently saw only two adjudications (hardly a sample sufficient to judge the efficacy of the scheme). The re-launched scheme covers a wider range of professionals, the removal of any limit on the amount of the claim and an attempt to cap the fees of the appointed adjudicator within certain bands depending on the value of the claim.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th June 2016
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘In Rai v Ministry of Defence (HH Judge Mark Gargan sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, judgment handed down on 9 May 2016), the Court had to determine whether the Rome II Regulation 864/2007 applied and to identify what was the proper law of the tort (Alberta law being the law of the place of the accident, or English law). The Claimant was a serving Ghurkha who, as part of Adventurous Training, was sent to Canada. In Canada he received training provided by a Canadian company (“Lazy H Trail Limited”) contracted to provide services, under a contract governed by Alberta law, for the benefit of the British Army. The circumstances of the accident were that the Claimant was kicked by a horse on the first day of training, as he attempted to clean the horse’s hoof, thereby suffering a head injury. The Claimant brought a claim for breach of a non-delegable duty of care in negligence against the Ministry of Defence.’
Old Square Chambers, 16th June 2016
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘A lender was entitled to recover the full amount of a refinancing loan it granted after relying on a negligent property valuation, and not just the ‘top-up’ funding, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 6th July 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Southport injury firm Fletchers claims to have secured the first judgment ordering defendants to make an interim costs payment based on the new version of the rules which came into force in April 2013.’
Litigation Futures, 5th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Prosecutors at the International Criminal Court will examine the Chilcot report for evidence of abuse and torture by British soldiers but have already ruled out putting Tony Blair on trial for war crimes.’
Daily Telegraph, 2nd July 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A consideration of the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Scott v Gavigan [2016] EWCA Civ 544 before Elias LJ, Clarke LJ and Simon LJ.’
Zenith PI Blog, 22nd June 2016
Source: www.zenithpiwordpress.com
‘A court has ruled a firm was not negligent in the advice it gave a couple who were dividing their shares in a property, after the judge said the firm did not need to advise them to seek separate advice.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 17th June 2016
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Leading group action law firm Leigh Day has been found guilty of professional negligence after 6,624 of the claimants it represented in the high-profile Trafigura case were not paid their share of the £30m settlement.’
Legal Futures, 17th June 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The family of an 18-year-old man who drowned following an epileptic seizure while under the care of Southern Health NHS foundation trust has been awarded £80,000 compensation.’
The Guardian, 9th June 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘In Bailey v Devon Partnership NHS Trust the High Court accepted, on the particular facts, that the statutory duty to carry out a risk assessment directly informed the extent of the common law duty of care.’
Tanfield Chambers, 26th May 2016
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024