News Category 2
PI Practitioner, February 2015
16/02/15. Each issue a particular topic is highlighted, citing some of the useful cases and other materials in that area. You can also receive these for free by registering for our PI Brief Update newsletter. Just select "Free Newsletter" from the menu at the top of this page and fill in your email address.
A number of liability decisions in clinical negligence actions were reported in January 2015
In Welch v Geoffrey Waterworth (Executor of the estate of Marjorie Waterworth, deceased) [2015] EWCA Civ 11, the appellant surgeon had performed an operation concerning the respondent's blocked aorta, following which she suffered irreversible failure of both kidneys. The judge at first instance had found that the surgeon had...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/EmiliaU
Loss of Earnings in a Case Where the Claimant Was a Child When Injured - Gordon Exall, Zenith Chambers
11/02/15. A claim made for loss of earnings when the claimant is a child is always problematic. There were several issues considered by Mr Justice Kenneth Parker in Tate -v- Ryder Holdings [2014] EWHC 4256(QB). Here we look at how the court approached the claim for loss of earnings.
THE CASE
The claimant was seriously injured when aged 11. He suffered brain injury. The defendant argued that his home background meant that he was never likely to be in paid employment. The judge summarised the position:-
Little was known about the Claimant’s grandparents and aunts. The family was a relatively tight, cross-involved network. None of the family group was called to give evidence, and I accept Mr Featherby’s point that, if any of them had appeared, it is very unlikely, given what was known about them, that the family picture that would have emerged would have...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/bluestocking
Downing v Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: Damages and Costs - Harry Trusted, Outer Temple Chambers
10/02/15. This was case was heard by Sir David Eady at the High Court in London on October 21 – 24 2014. On December 2nd 2014, the judge heard submissions on various consequential matters and the Approved Judgment (to be cited as [2014] EWHC 4216 was handed down on December 12 2014.
Note: The Defendant has sought permission to appeal the award and the outcome of that process is not yet known.
The Factual Background
The background to the case was unusual. The Claimant (Mr. Downing), had been a Class 2 Warrant Officer in the Army Air Corps. On medical advice, he underwent an operation in November 2006 which was intended to prevent him from snoring. He developed an infection which was followed by reactive arthritis which left him badly disabled. He was discharged from the army in August 2010 and he became virtually housebound and unable to participate in many ordinary domestic activities. There were substantial claims for costs of care and losses of earnings.
In December 2012, liability was compromised so that it was agreed that Mr. Downing would receive 63% of his assessed damages. The discount represented the litigation risk of failure of allegations of breach of duty and/or causation. The trial before Sir David Eady therefore concerned the assessment of damages only.
There was an issue of fact as to whether and to what extent the reactive arthritis could be...
Image cc Ian Britton
Rehab Experts and Catastrophic Brain Injury - Bill Braithwaite QC, Head of Exchange Chambers
04/02/15. I had a consultation recently with a rehabilitation expert, which made me wonder whether we should make more use of them following catastrophic brain injury. Once out of acute care, there are so many choices to be made, and the information available is very extensive. As with so many things in life, though, it’s not that easy.
The choice between in-patient and home-based rehabilitation is not always straightforward; it may be obvious that treatment in a unit is essential, for example because the patient needs extensive and intensive therapies, but it may not.
The personality of the patient can be very important in the decision; some people react badly to the hospital environment, and perform less well as a result.
Traditionally, we have expected case managers to advise about rehab, but the quality of that advice will depend on how much practical experience the case manager has.
Bill Braithwaite QC
Head of Exchange Chambers
This article was first published at http://billbraithwaiteqc.com/blog/
Image ©iStockphoto.com/kali9
Limitation in Contribution Claims - Andrew Roy, 12 Kings Bench Walk
03/02/15. Chief Constable of Hampshire v Southampton City Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1541. Court of Appeal Jackson, Patten and Lewison LJJ This case determined a short but important point as to when the limitation period runs (and therefore expires) in respect of a claim under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978.
Under section 10 Limitation Act 1980 the period for such claims is two years from the date when the cause of action for contribution is deemed to accrue, and that for the purpose of limitation the cause of action for contribution is deemed to accrue on either:
(1) The date when the wrongdoer claiming contribution is “held liable in respect of that damage” to the original victim by a “Judgment” or arbitrator’s “award” (subsection 10(3)); or...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/DNY59
More Articles...
- Allergies, Chemical Sensitivity and Susceptibility - Alan Care, Thomson Snell & Passmore
- Personal Injury Case Review Scotland 2014: Part 1 - Douglas McGregor, Brodies LLP
- Public Liability & Highways Claims Post-Jackson: The Portals - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom
- Applications for Payments on Account of Costs - Matthew Hoe, Jaggards & Taylor Rose Law
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
