‘In Reaney -v- University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 1119 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate approach to the award of damages when injuries are caused to a claimant who, prior to the defendant’s negligence, was already seriously disabled.’
Zenith PI Blog, 2nd November 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘An agency nurse has been found guilty of causing the death of a six-year-old boy by gross negligence.’
The Guardian, 2nd November 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Bridget Tatham follows the rise & risk of public sector outsourcing.’
New Law Journal, 26th October 2015
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘The High Court has given a reminder of the important qualification to the general principle that a lawyer, or licensed conveyancer, is not obliged to undertake investigations that are not expressly or impliedly requested by the client. The principle is subject to the qualification that: if in fact a solicitor acquires information that may be of importance to a client; then it is the duty of the solicitor to bring that information to the attention of the client. It is the client who decides whether the information is important; the lawyer should not presume to make that decision. Failing to consider information, to advise the client or even pass on such information to the client can be costly. It is safer to communicate too much rather than too little.’
36 Bedford Row Property Blog, 27th October 2015
Source: www.36property.co.uk
‘The new incarnation of the Saatchi bill to allow doctors to innovate without fear of negligence actions has continued its progress through parliament – but the legislation continues to divide opinion among MPs.’
Full story
Law Society’s Gazette, 17th October 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The case against two hospital nurses accused of wilfully neglecting vulnerable patients has collapsed.’
BBC News, 14th October 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Mishcon de Reya has failed in its bid to overturn the grant of relief from sanctions made in favour of claimants who are suing the London law firm for professional negligence but failed to serve their funding notice in time.’
Litigation Futures, 13th October 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘I’ve heard about a few costs decisions by trial judges recently which might be considered, to put it politely, interesting, or brave, in the Yes Minister sense. So it was with some interest that I read the Court of Appeal decision in Begum v Birmingham City Council [2015] EWCA Civ 386.’
Nearly Legal, 8th October 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision striking out a negligence claim against Birmingham law firm Blakemores, now in administration, and also set aside a default judgment obtained by the firm for £635,500 in costs.’
Legal Futures, 8th October 2015
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Collapsed Midlands firm Blakemores will face trial over a land registration dispute after the Court of Appeal reopened a case against it.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 7th October 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A husband and wife have won £10,000 each in damages from a local authority that wrongly kept their eight children in foster care. A deputy high court judge Sir Robert Francis said that if ever there was a case illustrating the challenges that faced children, parents, public authorities and the courts when concerns were raised about the safety and welfare of children, it was this one.’
The Guardian, 17th September 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘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.’
Zenith PI Blog, 10th September 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘It takes two years or more for 42% of medical negligence cases to settle or for damages to be awarded by the courts, research by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has revealed.’
Litigation Futures, 4th September 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Certain hotels are sited in city centres or close to the main road networks. They are easily accessible and some are vulnerable to misuse by those engaged in crime. Bookings can be made late at night; guests might arrive in large groups; they are sometimes able to bypass reception either on arrival or on departure; there may be no night receptionist to check who might be brought in. It is not unknown for particular hotels in particular areas to be used for the exploitation of vulnerable persons. It may be argued that certain hoteliers are on notice of a possible problem relating to the exploitation of young people within the network. The question is what is to be done to protect young people who might be taken to an hotel and there abused and to limit the exposure of the hotelier to liability for any claim which might be made against them. Some hoteliers actively seek the assistance of bodies such as the NSPCC in the preparation of training for staff. Training is not enough. Nor is the fact that guest accompanying a child may be obliged to identify the child and their relationship with the child.’
Six Pump Court, 10th August 2015
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘It is hard to escape the notion that the rise in the number of secondary victim claims in recent years owes its success to the amorphous concept of ‘proximity’. The test of proximity itself is well established: a secondary victim claimant can only establish a claim in law as a result of witnessing an event or its immediate aftermath. Establishing proximity does not pose much of a problem if the claimant has witnessed an accident itself; what remains controversial is defining the limit of “the event” and its “immediate aftermath”. Having looked at the decisions of the Courts on this issue, one would be forgiven for thinking that the boundaries are imposed somewhat arbitrarily. ‘
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th July 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘It had been 10 years since a secondary victim claim had reached the Court of Appeal when the important Taylor v A.Novo(UK) Ltd. [2014] QB 150 case was decided, in March 2013. By contrast, the last six months have seen a series of key decisions illustrating the approach first-instance Courts will take in the light of Taylor, namely Wild v Southend NHS; Brock v Northampton NHS; Berisha v Stone Superstore; Shorter v Surrey & Sussex NHS and culminating in another landmark Appeal decision in Liverpool Women’s Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Ronayne [2015] EWCA Civ 588.’
Full story
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th August 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
An assistant solicitor has admitted to having “fabricated” advice from counsel, two expert reports and a series of letters on a medical negligence case because she felt “completely panicked and couldn’t see a way out”.
Full story
Legal Futures, 11th August 2015
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A two-partner central London law firm has succeeded in striking out a professional negligence claim for over £8m.’
Full story
Legal Futures, 3rd August 2015
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘On the silver anniversary of the Limitation Act 1980 (“the Act”) and as we approach the emerald anniversary of the coming into force of section 14A of that Act, the recent case of Chinnock v Veale Wasbrough [2015] EWCA Civ 2014 shows that the interpretation of this complicated section remains far from straightforward.’
Full story
Hardwicke Chambers, 15th June 2015
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025