June 2013 Contents
![]() CPD Quiz The quiz is designed to meet the CPD requirements of the SRA and provides 1.5 hours accredited distance learning. Law Brief Publishing Ltd is registered with the Solicitors Regulation Authority for England and Wales, ref EGB/LBPL. The CPD is also valid for cILEX (formerly ILEX) members and for members of the Chartered Insurance Institute (CII). Please check with the relevant organisation for full details of their CPD rules. Take the CPD Quiz Feedback Form CPD Information |
|
Personal Injury Articles | |
![]() The decision in Williams v. Estate of Dayne Joshua Williams [2013] EWCA Civ 455 has confirmed that the well-known principles in Froom v Butcher [1976] QB 286 apply equally to contribution proceedings against parents who fail to secure their children in appropriate child restraint seats. |
![]() The High Court (in the guise of Edwards-Stuart J sitting in the Technology and Construction Court) has recently provided one of the first insights into the approach to be taken by the courts to applications for relief from sanctions in the post-Jackson era. |
![]() With the Government's amendment to the Enterprise Bill 2013 due to abolish strict liability in employers' claims, it seems that certain Courts were ahead of the pack in seeking to mitigate what [they?] saw as the potentially unfair consequence of construing the Regulations too strictly against quasi-employers. |
![]() Leeds County Court considered the application of S 2(2) of the Animals Act and the defences in the case of Preskey v Carl Sutcliffe (1) Emma Sutcliffe (2) LTL 25.3.2013, Document no. AC0136. |
![]() At approximately 5.30pm on 29th October 2007 the Claimant ('C') tripped and fell on a raised cobblestone in the surrounding area of a tree pit in Henderson Street, Preston. The Defendant ('D') was the relevant highway authority for the purposes of the Highways Act 1980. |
![]() Part 18 is one of the shortest Parts of the Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 18(1) simply provides that at any time the Court may order a party to "clarify" or "give additional information" in relation to "any matter which is in dispute in the proceedings". It is nevertheless a significant provision... |
![]() Case Comment: Sayers v Chelwood (Deceased) and Chelwood [2012] EWCA Civ 1715; [2013] 2 All E.R. 232; [2013] P.I.Q.R. P8. This case helpfully provides a final answer to the question whether a Claimant seeking under s33 Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the s11 statute bar should face a very heavy burden in doing so. The answer, in short is, no. |
![]() Originally a personal injury trust was simply a method of sheltering compensation paid to someone as a result of personal injury. For someone receiving means tested benefits, this would mean that the compensation did not form part of their capital for benefit purposes, and they would therefore not be caught by the maximum capital rules. |
![]() The recent case of Wall v Mutuelle De Poitiers Assurances ([2013] EWHC 53 (QB)) sheds light on the ambit of the applicable law under Rome II (Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations). |
![]() Thirteen years ago, the Woolf Reforms (allegedly) heralded a "Brave New World" for civil litigation. The intention was to give Judges significant control of cases, and prevent claims being delayed unnecessarily. Issuing proceedings was intended to be a last resort. The consequences of default would be Draconian. The sound of Practitioner's knees knocking together could be heard up and down the jurisdiction. Then... |
![]() The Defective Premises Act 1972 ("DPA") is an important but frequently misunderstood cause of action for personal injury claims. This article aims to provide an introduction to claims under the Act, and in particular to provide a practical overview of when and how the DPA applies... |
![]() The last few months have not been an easy time for personal injury lawyers but I believe the response to the Jackson reforms is encouraging. The speed with which we were required to assimilate and adjust to major rule changes presented a challenge but, by and large, PI lawyers are a practical bunch and we have risen to that challenge. |
![]() "Err... sorry but, we have your skeleton argument, but the Judge says he doesn't have any other documents from the Defendant. It seems half the court file has been lost". This was the lament from a very long-suffering court usher to the author just recently ahead of a Fast Track trial. |
![]() The issue of impecuniosity has already gained notoriety for its lack of a certain definition. With varying approaches taken within Lagden v O'Connor itself, the issue has been one open to debate and is often reliant on the Court's involvement for settlement. Since Lagden, many have awaited a more certain definition. This has, to date, remained outstanding, and it is submitted that convolution, rather than clarification, is on the horizon. |
![]() Lord Neuberger President of the Supreme Court this week gave a strong warning that the cuts being made to legal aid and to the cost of litigation are likely to have a knock-on effect to the cost of the courts. Finally judges are speaking up to defend the rule of law. It's a welcome voice in these Post-Jackson days. |
![]() The Chief Constable of Hampshire Police v Taylor [2013] EWCA Civ 496. This case provides a telling illustration of the stringency of the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 ("the PPE Regulations") and the evidential difficulties a Defendant is likely to face rebutting liability under health and safety regulations. |
![]() Michael Wink v Croatio Osiguranje DD [2013] EWHC 1118 (QB) (Haddon-Cave J). This case arose out of a road traffic accident in Croatia on 5 September 2009. The Claimant, a UK national domiciled in England, was on holiday with his wife when the accident happened. |
![]() A phrase I like using to all those involved on the claimant's side of a catastrophic personal injury claim is: "How can we help the defence lawyers and insurer to see the real nature of the problems suffered by the Claimant?". |
![]() In Onay v Brown [2009] EWCA Civ 775, the Defendant car driver admitted liability and consented to the entry of judgment against him, the sole remaining issue on liability being whether the Claimant motorcyclist was speeding and/or... |
![]() The Government has apparently decided to wait until later this year to make a decision upon whether to increase the small claims limit for PI claims from £1,000 to £5,000. In the meantime APIL research suggests that such an increase would push 70% of PI cases into the Small Claims Process. Disaster? |
![]() The case of Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Limited [2013] EWHC 1242 (TCC) concerned a relief from sanctions application under r. 3.9. The decision was in fact made under the old rules because the application was made prior to 1st April... |
![]() Since the advent of the CPR, the use of employment experts has declined. Whereas it was once common in personal injury claims to adduce evidence from an employment consultant as to the likely career path that a claimant was going to... |
![]() Cynical defendant lawyers regard applications under s 33 of the Limitation Act to extend time for bringing personal injury proceedings as invariably going the claimants' way. Some see it as effectively a statutory abolition of the limitation period. |
![]() Selecting experts in catastrophic injury claims crops up again and again - not surprisingly, because they are so important. It is always interesting, though, to see their different approaches to problems in... |
![]() The new rules will force lawyers to take a close look at the economics of presenting an injury claim and how most efficiently to put the claim together. Medical reports remain essential to such a claim, providing, as they do, the foundations of much of the claim... |
![]() A photograph of an injury can be a powerful and effective tool in its ability to depict severity, and its subtle ability to evoke a sympathetic understanding of suffering and pain which would otherwise be difficult to portray... |
![]() Examining the liabilities of match officials for catastrophic injuries arising in sport following the leading cases of Smoldon v Nolan, and Vowles v Evans. |
![]() Here is a summary of the recent notable court cases over the past month. |
![]() Each issue a particular topic is highlighted, citing some of the useful cases and other materials in that area. This month: Wasted Costs. |
|
Medico-Legal Articles, Edited by Dr Hugh Koch | |
![]() Sleep disorders in children can manifest themselves immediately after a trauma, and have been found to continue years following the traumatic incident (Glod, Teicher, Hartman, & Harakal, 1997). An interesting relationship has been found between sleep problems in children and the traumatic symptoms experienced by the mother of the child following an RTA. |
|
Expert Witness Articles | |
![]() Should claimants continue to have the whip hand? The Government's recent consultation paper, Reducing the number and cost of whiplash claims, stresses the need for better medical evidence. In response, Cardiff University Law School has launched its Medico-Legal Foundation Certificate for expert witnesses in association with Bond Solon Training. |