This site uses cookies.

21 June 2007 Summary

NEWSLETTER

Industry News
Summary of Recent Cases - Substantive Law
Summary of Recent Cases - Costs
Summary of Recent Cases - Civil Procedure
PI Practitioner

LAW JOURNAL

Editorial

Personal Injury Articles

Getting Judges to Change their own Decisions - Niazi Fetto, 2 Temple Gardens
It is the common experience of lawyers of all kinds to disagree with decisions made against their clients. When a decision is thought to be wrong, an appeal is almost immediately considered, but is an appeal always the appropriate next step? And what if a judge, having made a decision, thinks better of it afterwards? Can he/she change it without erring in law?

A load of Scottish Chickens: Hughes v Grampian Country Food Group [2007] CISH 32 - Tim Petts, 12 King’s Bench Walk
In this recent Scottish case, the Court of Session (headed by the Lord President, Lord Hamilton) has taken another look at the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992, in particular at what constitutes a "load".

European Updates: Part 1 - Katherine Deal, 3 Hare Court
Two recent developments in Brussels have potentially far-reaching impact on personal injury claims in this country, particularly (but not exclusively) where the accident is one that happened overseas. This article deals with issues arising out of the proposed harmonisation of European limitation periods applicable to personal injury claims.

Clinicians or Statisticians: Who Should Give Evidence on Life Expectancy? - Daniel Tobin, 12 King’s Bench Walk
Rule 35.1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 provides: "Expert evidence shall be restricted to that which is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings". The recent decision of Tugendhat J in the case of Jennifer Arden v. Anthony Malcolm [2007] EWHC 404 (QB) is an illustration of this rule in practice. It also contains guidance on the use of statistical evidence in high value claims, as well as reiterating the correct approach to be adopted by an appellate court when dealing with an appeal from a case management decision.

R v Joseph’s Hair Design: Hairdressing Claims - Rankeshwar Batta, Anthony Collins Solicitors
Hairdressing claims do not really feature on a regular basis in general personal injury practice. Most people will either never seek redress for minor problems that arise following a trip to the hairdressers or even when things go wrong, they are simply not clear as to whether they have a claim of any sort.


Clinical Negligence Articles

Fairness To All: Standards of proof in healthcare-related disciplinary tribunals - Richard Booth,
When I last wrote for this journal, I concentrated on the issue of fairness and the General Medical Council. I referred there to the sea change in medical disciplinary tribunals which is being wrought by the conclusions of Dame Janet Smith in the Shipman Report. I now turn my gaze to the related but thorny issue of the standard of proof to be applied in disciplinary tribunals across the wider healthcare field.


Medico-Legal Articles, Edited by Dr Hugh Koch

Chronic Pain and Problem Drug Use - Karen Simpson, BUPA Hospital, Leeds
Chronic pain and addictive disorders present significant medical and public health problems; both are under diagnosed and inadequately treated. The occurrence of pain and addiction adds complexity to the assessment and treatment of both disorders.


Mediation & ADR Articles, Edited by Justin Patten

How lawyers should prepare for the day of the mediation - Justin Patten, Human Law
In last month’s edition of PI Brief Update Law Journal, we explored about the ways which lawyers should prepare prior to the mediation taking place. In this month’s edition what we will do is to consider how lawyers should conduct the mediation with their clients on the day of the hearing.


Charon QC

Charon QC, June 2007
Charon has a mixed bag for you this month: Flashing, a podcast on mediation with Justin Patten, a quibble of lawyers, and advice is the curse of the drinking classes.

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.