‘Shaun O’Neil and Nicola Hyam report on a recent case where a claimant sought to argue that a village road in the Lakes should have been maintained to the standards of a footway.’
Local Government Lawyer, 14th January 2022
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Making claims against the NHS can be “a difficult, and in some cases inhumane, experience”, with the worst cases seeing staff trying to “proactively cover up” errors and even fabricating medical records, a report has found.
However, in other cases they were “very upfront about what had gone wrong” and consultants recommended taking legal action, according to research for the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL).’
Legal Futures, 12th January 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A television producer has been cleared of deliberately causing a car to crash into the back of his bike in a case described as “unique and bizarre” by his celebrity lawyer.’
The Independent, 6th January 2022
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘What approach should the court take when there is a fundamental dispute of fact between an individual’s recollection given in witness evidence and contemporaneous medical records? This was the issue in the trial of HTR v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 3228 (QB), heard by Cotter J between 5 and 7 October 2021. The case will be of interest to clinical negligence practitioners following the judge’s preference of the Claimant’s mother’s witness evidence about matters that occurred 17 years earlier, despite the existence of a medical note made at the time which appeared to directly contradict that evidence.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 7th December 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘A former pastry chef at Heston Blumenthal’s Fat Duck restaurant has claimed she was left with crippling repetitive strain injury from placing sweets into bags using tweezers and hand-making chocolate playing cards and about 550 whisky wine gums a day, court documents show.’
The Guardian, 13th December 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Adrian Neale considers the question of when a claimant’s exaggeration of injury can be said to be deliberate and dishonest, following a recent appeal brought by a local authority.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd December 2021
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Former Flat jockey Freddy Tylicki’s £6m negligence claim against fellow rider Graham Gibbons has begun in the High Court.’
BBC News, 29th November 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The drunkenness of a passenger seeking damages for injuries sustained in a car crash ‘will not avoid a finding of contributory negligence’ where the claimant should have appreciated that the driver was too drunk to drive safely, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Law Society's Gazette, 16th November 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In Castello v Gonschior [2021] EWHC 2742 (QB), Lambert J provides an important reminder of the importance of choosing the right experts and an example of the relevance, or lack of relevance, of complaints by other patients, and the evidential principles of “res ipsa loquitur” and Keefe v The Isle of Man Steam Packet Co Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 683 (“Keefe”) in clinical negligence claims.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 11th November 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘A boy who suffered “catastrophic brain injuries” when doctors failed to see he had a virus and sent him home after he had a seizure has been awarded £27m.’
BBC News, 11th November 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Civil practitioners dealing with personal injury claims are generally familiar with the three-year limitation period imposed by section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980. Put simply, claims for personal injury (whether arising from negligence, nuisance or breach of duty) must be brought within three years of the date on which the cause of action accrued (section 11(4)(a)) or the date of knowledge (if later) of the person injured (section 11(4)(b)). A person’s “date of knowledge” for the purposes of section 11(4)(b) is defined in section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 2nd November 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
“An experienced solicitor who worked at Slater & Gordon has been struck off after telling a personal injury client that her case was ongoing when it had actually settled and using some of the money to pay other clients damages they were not entitled to.”
Legal Futures, 4th November 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
“A former police officer who claimed he was in too much pain to work has been jailed for fraud after a covert surveillance team caught him playing sport and an app on his phone showed he was taking 10,000 steps a day.”
The Guardian, 4th November 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Claimant was employed as a labourer by the Second Defendant (‘YKS’) who, in turn, were engaged by the Appellant Fourth Defendant (‘Buttar’) as an independent brickwork contractor. The First and Third Defendants were individuals who controlled the Second and Fourth Defendants. The Claimant suffered catastrophic injuries at a building site and brought proceedings in negligence against, inter alia, YKS, as his employer; and Buttar, as the main contractor on site. The Court recognised that there was a compelling need for an interim payment to fund an appropriate rehabilitation package for the Claimant if he was able to satisfy the legal requirements for obtaining the same.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 28th October 2021
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘QOCS applies to most personal injury (“PI”) claims. It usually limits the ability of a successful defendant to recover its costs against an unsuccessful claimant.’
Lamb Chambers, October 2021
Source: www.lambchambers.co.uk
‘A law firm now part of consolidator Metamorph Law has been only partially successful in striking out a claim over how it advised a client on his clinical negligence case.’
Legal Futures, 1st November 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘This blog deals with the causation aspects of Thorley v Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 2604 (QB). Philip Godfrey dealt with the factual background and breach of duty aspects of this case in his recent blog. In short, Soole J preferred the evidence of the Defendant’s expert and dismissed the claim on that basis. In so doing, however, he concluded that as a matter of law the material contribution approach to causation does not apply when there is a single tortfeasor and an indivisible injury.
Soole J is surely right to acknowledge that this is an issue “ripe for authoritative review” (see [151]), but it is suggested that his reasons for reaching the above conclusion are somewhat questionable.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 26th October 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘In Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43, the Supreme Court considered the mechanics of qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS). The claimant was injured in a road traffic accident in 2012. In 2017, she was offered £30,000 by the defendant in settlement of her claim in what was described as a “Part 36 offer letter”. In that letter, the defendant offered to pay the claimant’s costs “in accordance with Part 36 rule 13”, such costs to be subject to detailed assessment if not agreed, if the offer was accepted within 21 days. The claimant decided to accept the offer and a Tomlin order was subsequently made by consent. However, the defendant then argued that the claimant’s costs were limited to the fixed costs recoverable in accordance with the terms of Part 45 Section IIIA of the Civil Procedure Rules.’
Law Society's Gazette, 25th October 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024