|
PERSONAL INJURY
St. Helen’s Metropolitan Borough Council v Barnes, CA (Civ Div) 25/10/2006; Independent, October 27, 2006
For the purposes of the expiry of the limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 s.11(3) a claim was "brought" when a claimant's request for the issue of a claim form was delivered to the correct court office during its opening hours.
Coal Mining Contractors v Davies & Ors, CA (Civ Div) 20/10/2006
It had been a correct exercise of discretion not to join coalmining contractors to proposed group litigation between coalminers and the Department of Trade and Industry.
AB & Ors v Department of Trade & Industry S/A British Coal Corp & Ors, CA (Civ Div) 19/10/2006
An arrangement for compensation for vibration white finger, involving close supervision by the courts, included the power of the supervising judge to make a financial award where there were delays in dealing with the claims.
Atkins v Ealing London Borough Council, High Ct, 17/10/2006
In a case where a pedestrian had sustained injuries after stepping on an unstable manhole cover located in a shopping street, the highway authority had failed to show by its system of purely visual inspections that it had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secure that the manhole cover was not dangerous.
Gatfield v Whitbread Plc, High Ct, 9/8/2006
A claimant who began to suffer from epilepsy six weeks after an accident at work in which he was hit on the head had failed to establish that it had been caused by the accident because the evidence did not show that he had suffered a brain injury that would have increased his risk of suffering from the condition.
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE
Holt v Edge, High Ct, 26/7/2006
On the evidence, a general practitioner was not liable in negligence to the claimant for failing to diagnose a sub-arachnoid haemorrhage and refer her to hospital as she had presented with unusual symptoms. Even if there had been negligence, it was likely that the claimant would have suffered a stroke in any event.
NEGLIGENCE
Smith & Anr v Harris, PC(Cl)(Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Mance) 30/10/2006; [2006] UKPC 48
The judge and the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands had been justified in holding that the appellant was solely to blame for a road traffic accident in which his car collided with the respondent's car, and in finding that the physical evidence was not inconsistent with the respondent's version of events leading up to the accident.
Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Plc v Telewest Ltd, CA (Civ Div) 31/10/2006
Under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 s.82 if a statutory undertaker caused or required damage to apparatus belonging to another person in the course of street repairs, whoever it was that actually did the work that constituted the damage, the statutory undertaker had to pay for the making good of that damage unless it could establish negligence or misconduct by the other person under s.82(4) of the Act.
HEALTH
Khokhar v Health Professions Council, High Ct (Admin) 20/10/2006
A clinical scientist's fitness to practise was clearly impaired by reason of lack of competence where the evidence showed a substantial number of errors across a broad area, concerning different topics and over a considerable period of time. It was clear from the evidence that those were serious errors, and assessments had revealed a serious lack of knowledge.
CIVIL EVIDENCE
Miller v Garton Shires & Anr, CA (Civ Div) 25/10/2006
There was no principle or practice that the court could not summarily dismiss a claim where there was untested paper evidence supporting it.
Stallwood v David & Anr, High Ct, 25/10/2006
Under CPR Part 35 there were circumstances in which a party dissatisfied with an amended opinion from their expert after the experts' discussion could obtain permission to rely on evidence adduced from an additional expert.
Casey v Cartwright, CA (Civ Div) 5/10/2006
The Court of Appeal gave guidance on the procedure to be followed where a defendant in a low-velocity road traffic claim sought to adduce his own expert evidence on causation.
West Bromich Albion Football Club Ltd v El-Safty, CA (Civ Div) 11/10/2006
There was no contract, and it was not necessary to imply one, under which an orthopaedic surgeon owed a duty to a football club to advise the club in respect of his treatment of one its players and about its financial affairs, and the surgeon owed no duty of care in tort in respect of any foreseeable economic loss to the club resulting from the negligent treatment.
|
