This site uses cookies.

February 2024 Contents

Welcome to the February 2024 issue of PI Brief Update Law Journal. Click the relevant links below to read the articles.

CPD

Note that there are no new monthly CPD quizzes since the SRA and the BSB have both updated their CPD schemes to eliminate this requirement. Reading PIBULJ articles can still help to meet your CPD needs. For further details see our CPD Information page.

 

Personal Injury Articles
Court of Appeal delivers judgment on the delivery of judgments: it is not a transactional process - Nancy Kelehar, Temple Garden Chambers
YM (Care Proceedings) (Clarification of Reasons) [2024] EWCA Civ 71. Date of Judgment: 08/02/2024. In the context of a family case relating to a fact-finding hearing in respect of injuries inflicted on a young child, Lord Justice Baker has given guidance applicable more widely in civil proceedings in which clarification is sought of the judgment. Practitioners should heed this guidance and be wary of making excessive and unnecessary requests for clarification. At the outset, the Court of Appeal made...
A Vindication (and QOCS Protection) for Vindicatory Claims: Clark v Adams [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) - Amy Lanham Coles, Temple Garden Chambers
This claim raised a question about the application of QOCS where nominal damages of '£1 for vindicatory purposes' was sought. The claim was brought against Mr Gerry Adams (former President of Sinn Fein; First Defendant) and the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA; Second Defendant) for injuries suffered following bombings at the Old Bailey, London Docklands and Arndale Centre Manchester in 1973 and 1996. The claims were premised on the torts of assault and battery...
Not a Soft Touch: Walker v Mersey Care NHS Foundation [2024] EWHC 119 (KB) - Amy Lanham Coles, Temple Garden Chambers
This claim was brought following an accident that occurred when the Claimant, an employee of the Defendant NHS Foundation, was asked to participate in a game described as 'soft touch' football at a mental health unit. The Claimant sustained an injury to the face when the ball was kicked (allegedly hard and above chest height) by a fellow employee, Mr Callaghan. The case explores issues arising where a party seeks a late amendment to their pleaded case to align with their own...
Court of Appeal assesses the scope of solicitors' duty of care to prospective clients during an initial call to their helpline - Nancy Kelehar, Temple Garden Chambers
Miller v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2024] EWCA Civ 53. Date of Judgment: 01/02/2024. Whilst on holiday in Turkey in May 2014, the Claimant slipped and fell down some stairs in the hotel in which she was staying. She broke her leg and underwent surgery in Turkey. Upon returning to England, she developed an infection and, 18 months post-accident, she required an amputation of her lower leg. The Claimant had an initial call with the Legal Helpline at Irwin Mitchell (IM) on 19 May 2014, just six...
Clinical Negligence Medicine by Dr Mark Burgin
GMC Good Medical Practice: Loopholes and Unreasonable Expectations - Dr Mark Burgin
Dr Mark Burgin explores the perverse effects of the GMC's new Good Medical Practice guidelines by creating loopholes and unreasonable expectations of doctor behaviour. The GMC Good Medical Practice 2024 has some areas of improvement over the 2013 iteration but there are some areas that are less good. The new guidance leaves some loopholes which the general public could be concerned about. The failure to balance the rights of the doctor and patient to make...
What Can MedCo Do About the Crisis in PI? - Dr Mark Burgin
Dr Mark Burgin considers what MedCo with limited resources, diversity and few powers could reasonably do to slow the deterioration in the PI industries performance. Since MedCo was founded in 2015 as a quasi-regulator the PI industry has changed from an active business run by the best legal brains to an online system run mainly by case handlers. The quality of medical reports has fallen from detailed bespoke individualised opinions to one-size-fits-all computer-generated documents with...

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.