November 2023 Contents
 Welcome to the November 2023 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 | |
 £1 million settlement in vaginal mesh implant case renews calls for a settlement scheme - Nancy Kelehar, Temple Garden Chambers A 59-year-old woman has reached a settlement of over £1 million in relation to medical issues that arose as a result of a vaginal mesh implant. She received the transvaginal tape (TVT) mesh implant at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) in 2009 following a hysterectomy. This procedure was recommended as treatment for a diagnosis of uterine prolapse which was causing lower abdominal discomfort and increased frequency of urination... |
 FREE CHAPTER from 'A Practical Guide to Material Contribution in Clinical Negligence' by Rhodri Jones The current state of the law regarding material contribution in clinical negligence appears complicated and uncertain. This book charts the evolution of material contribution as a concept in causation from its original application in occupational disease cases to its more recent analysis in the context of clinical negligence. As with many areas of common law, the courts have attempted to define the factual characteristics of cases where material contribution causation can apply. It is commonly plead in clinical negligence where... |
 Interim interim payments on account of costs - Amy Lanham Coles, Temple Garden Chambers Shaun Trotman v Master Brickwork London Essex Limited [2023] EWHC 2791 (KB). This case dealt with the question of whether a successful Claimant is limited to securing a singular interim payment on account of costs before commencing detailed assessment under CPR rule 44.2(8). In this case, the Claimant, a protected party, had obtained a settlement for serious injuries he had sustained falling through a skylight. The settlement approval consent order had included an order for an interim payment on account of... |
 Lifting the QOCS cap under r.44.16(2) and whether it is just to do so - Nancy Kelehar, Temple Garden Chambers Amjad v UK Insurance Limited [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB). Date of Judgment: 10/11/2023. Mr Justice Richie allowed an appeal of a costs decision relating to the exceptions to the QOCS protection from adverse costs orders against claimants in 'mixed claims' (i.e. where there is a personal injury (PI) element and a non-PI element)... |
 All change but what change? Looking ahead to potential policy reforms for clinical negligence litigation - Amy Lanham Coles, Temple Garden Chambers Consultations are rumbling on. As previously mentioned in this newsletter, the government is currently working towards policy changes to lower value clinical negligence claims (those valued between £1501 and £25000). The original consultation concluded in 2022, with the government recently confirming their intention to bring in a fixed costs regime known as the 'LDFRC scheme'. The policy intent is... |
|
| Clinical Negligence Medicine by Dr Mark Burgin | |
 What are solicitor instructions? - Dr Mark Burgin Before an expert is instructed the solicitor or case hander should check the fit between the expert's expertise and the case. The instructions would then provide that expert with information that they require to do their job. Instructions have four basic functions which ideally would be addressed in every case: Providing background information about the case... |
 Why you have no right to the best treatment - Dr Mark Burgin Dr Mark Burgin asks why the logical reasoning in case law of Clinical Negligence is difficult to follow and appears to be a barrier to patients getting the best treatment. In the context of healthcare, the patient's right to the best treatment is a complex and contested issue. While there is a general consensus that patients should have access to good quality care, there is no clear definition of what constitutes 'the best treatment' and there are a number of factors that can limit a patient's ability... |
![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)
