‘The Employment Appeal Tribunal recently considered whether a probation service officer who failed to disclose a child protection issue was fairly dismissed. Ceri Fuller, Zoë Wigan and Hilary Larter analyse the outcome.’
Local Government Lawyer, 14th February 2020
‘The inquest into the death of Marc Anthony Cole has concluded with the jury finding he died from excess use of cocaine resulting in paranoid and erratic behaviour, with the use of a Taser by Devon and Cornwall Police having a more than trivial impact on Marc going into cardiac arrest. The medical cause of death included the use of cocaine, an episode of altered behaviour including self-harm, excitement, exertion and restraint including the discharge of a TASER X26 device.’
Garden Court Chambers, 30th January 2020
‘Rebecca Hill provides her Corporate Crime analysis for Lexis Nexis PSL: The Court of Appeal considered the safety of the conviction of Abdurahman who had assisted one of the 21/7 London bombers after the event. It reaffirmed that its purpose is to objectively appraise the safety of a conviction looking to all the circumstances, notwithstanding in this case a finding by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that Mr Abdurahman’s rights under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (right to a fair trial) had been breached.’
5 SAH, 3rd February 2020
‘The 2019 professional liability case law was dominated by four core themes, which arose repeatedly in numerous contexts in claims against lawyers and auditors in particular:
-Multiple interlocking attacks on different aspects of the “loss of a chance” doctrine, anchored in both “lost litigation” claims and defective business deals. As we explain, the case law has been marked by various parties trying to opt out of parts of the existing Allied Maples doctrine, or bend the requirements to their particular circumstances.
-The continued adoption of “assumption of responsibility” as the appropriate test for duty of care to non-clients, and the extent to which the principle is relevant to the scope of duty owed to a client.
-The debate over how the distinction between “information” and “advice” cases plays out in the context of the respective duties of auditors and directors for the running of companies (both in the context of scope of duty and contributory negligence).
-The way in which a claimant’s wrongdoing should “taint” a claim against a professional. This theme emerged in the loss of a chance context, in respect of “ex turpi causa”, and in relation to the ever-challenging issue of attribution.’
4 New Square, 7th January 2020