News Category 3
Blankley v Central Manchester NHS [2015] EWCA Civ 18: A Narrow Issue? - Matthew Smith, Kings Chambers
20/02/15. The claimant was very seriously injured by the defendant’s clinical negligence. Her capacity to litigate fluctuated. When she had capacity she agreed a CFA with her solicitors. She then lost capacity. On accepted authority, that loss of capacity immediately terminated the solicitors’ agency. The judge at first instance accepted that this brought the contract of retainer to an end. No subsequent retainer was agreed on behalf of the claimant by the person who ultimately became her deputy (a partner in the conducting firm of solicitors). The solicitors plainly acted on CFA terms and claimed a success fee in the bill for the period after the loss of capacity. The judge at first instance concluded that the demised CFA had not been replaced. There was no subsequent CFA in writing. Accordingly, by reason of section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, there was no enforceable retainer between the client and the solicitors for the period after loss of capacity.
Phillips J sitting with assessors [2014] EWHC 168 (QB) allowed an appeal by the claimant having concluded that the claimant’s CFA was not frustrated and did not terminate upon the claimant’s loss of capacity. The defendant appealed. On 27 January 2015, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment. The reasons were given by...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/RapidEye
The Global Scope of Employer's Liability - Jack Harding, 1 Chancery Lane
18/02/15. It is trite law that an employer’s duty to its employees is non-delegable. The duty is to take reasonable care to see that the employee is not exposed to unnecessary risk. In the vast majority of cases, the scope and content of this duty will be easy to define, since the accident will have occurred on premises owned or controlled by the Defendant. In perhaps a minority of cases, the accident will occur whilst the employee is visiting other premises, for example to pick up or deliver goods. Again, although the standard of care required may be lower, the employer is not divested of its obligation to take reasonable care, whether through devising a safe system of work or ensuring that the employee has available proper and safe equipment.
What, however, is the case where the employee is sent abroad, in the course of his employment? To what extent does the employer owe a duty in circumstances where it cannot sensibly be said that it owns or controls either the transport used or the premises visited?
The leading authority on this point remains the court of appeal’s decision in...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/wickedberlin
Summary of Recent Cases, February 2015
15/02/15. Here is a summary of the recent notable court cases over the past month. You can also receive these for free by registering for our PI Brief Update newsletter. Just select "Free Newsletter" from the menu at the top of this page and fill in your email address..
Summary of Recent Cases - Substantive Law
Andrew Foulds (2) Claire Foulds (Both as Personal Representatives of Benjamin Foulds, Deceased) v Devon County Council (HHJ Cotter 2015, 9 January 2015)
A cyclist had suffered head and spinal injuries after losing control of his bicycle and crashed into...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/spxChrome
Jeyakanthan Rengasamy v Homebase Ltd (Lawtel, 23 January 2015, Knowles J) - Michele De Gregorio, Crown Office Chambers
14/02/15. Appeal against case management decision refusing permission for parties' engineering experts to give oral evidence at trial. Michele De Gregorio appeared for the successful appellant, instructed by BLM.
The claimant fell from a ladder purchased from one of the defendant's stores. He sought damages for personal injuries for breach of the implied term under s.14(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. The front legs of the ladder had buckled and the question arose whether the ladder collapsed due to a defect or whether the claimant simply fell and landed on the ladder causing the observed damage.
The parties had permission to rely upon written reports from their own engineering experts as to the likely cause of the damage to the ladder. The experts prepared a joint statement in which they...
Image cc flickr.com/photos/theenmoy/5472993906
Investigating Liability And Causation - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom
13/02/15. In 2001, there were 204,839 road traffic accidents in England and 9,499 road traffic accidents in Wales. This chapter aims to look at the various methods of investigating liability in road traffic accidents. The Highway Code can be a useful tool when determining the issue of liability. It may be helpful to have a copy of the most recent Highway Code in order to assist with the determination of liability.
Section 38(7) of the Road Traffic Act 1998 states a failure on the part of the person to observe the Highway Code shall not itself render a person liable to criminal proceedings of any kind, but “any such failure in any proceedings, whether civil or criminal, can be relied upon by either party to the proceedings attempting to establish or to negative any liability which is in question in those proceedings”. In the case of Wakeling –v- McDoanagh and The MIB, McKie J held that “any breach of the Highway Code is relevant but not determinative”.
The case of Goad –v- Butcher reconfirmed this approach, holding that failure to observe the Highway Code may be evidence of negligence, but this would very much depend upon the circumstances in which the accident in question was committed and the casual relevance of any breach to the Claimant.
Reported Cases
Reported cases in road traffic accidents are extremely useful in relation to establishing negligence in specific types of accident, for example a motor cycle travelling up the outside lane of a lane of...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/GNK82
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
| 'RTA Personal Injury Claims Post-Jackson: A Practical Guide' by Andrew Mckie ISBN: 978-0-9575530-7-1 Published: February 2015 Price: £49.99 Click here to order now |
![[Click here to read chapter one online for free!]](http://www.pibriefupdate.com/images/rtapiclaims.png) |
![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)
