News Category 3
An Analysis of Serious Psychological Injury Following UK Military Service - Rushmi Sethi
12/02/15. An analysis of serious psychological injury following UK military service at work with reference to case law, published journal articles, and medical evidence. Exposure to intense combat is among the most commonly associated traumas with PTSD. Military personnel wounded in action e.g. military air accidents, or involved in direct combat, puts those in a high-risk group for developing PTSD. Depression may occur as a psychological response to severe physical injury and chronic disabling conditions after military combat. Vulnerability factors are thought to increase the likelihood of depression in the presence of provoking life-events. Pronounced negative thinking and flashbacks suggests that cognitive behavioural therapy may be helpful. A confiding relationship and a job could therefore be factors which protect against serious psychological injury. It is in the claimant’s best interests to be seen by an experienced consultant psychiatrist and/or psychologist with relevant knowledge.
Introduction
Serious psychological injury following military service is an esoteric concept. It can include injuries such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, Chronic Pain, Depression and Post Traumatic Amnesia. This article is a review of journal articles and medical evidence with regard to serious psychological injury from 1997-2014 and endeavours to link this material effectively to an account of the relevant military case law.
The author of this article is a lawyer, not a medical practitioner nor a member of the UK Armed Forces. The intent of this article is to provide a layperson’s guide to some important psychological consequences which may manifest after military service.
Review of Serious Psychological Injury
There are several conditions which may present following military service. They are discussed below...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/Rockfinder
Exploring the Employer/Employee Relationship - Geoff Owen, Parabis Group
09/02/15. A number of recent cases have explored the relationship between two parties to determine whether or not they were employer and employee. The test is usually relatively straightforward: was there in place a contract of service (employee) or a contract for services (independent contractor)?
This was the issue in Nadeem v Shell UK Oil Products and another (2014) in which the claimant argued that he was an employee and the defendants liable for the stress related illness he developed at work.
The relationship between the parties was governed by a retail business agreement (RBA) under which the claimant operated a number of petrol stations for the defendants. He was obliged by the terms of the RBA to buy fuel and other products as directed by the defendants and the proceeds were paid into a bank account from which the defendants could draw what was owed to them by direct debit. The claimant was also permitted to stock and sell other goods and retain the profits. He claimed that he was owed a duty of care by the defendants as an employee under a contract of service, or alternatively that he was a...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/
Measurable Goals - Bill Braithwaite QC, Head of Exchange Chambers
07/02/15. Following on from my last blog, talking about rehabilitation, measurable goals are becoming increasingly important. I've had a couple of experiences recently which suggest to me that we lawyers may not do enough to make sure the rehab unit sets measurable goals, and measures progress against them.
I think that, to set effective goals, one needs to analyse the rehab process in some detail. For example, if physio is part of the process, it should be possible to identify an ultimate goal, and all the steps (!) needed to reach it. If, for example, walking without any aid seems realistic, but the patient is currently far removed from that achievement, we could perhaps look for a weekly or monthly prediction of what physio should achieve. It might be possible to predict a few steps with two sticks or crutches, and one or two people supporting at the end of the first week or month, followed by one stick, one person, and eventually none, decreasing incrementally over the weeks or months.
Of course, such predictions may turn out to be inaccurate, but that’s not a problem, provided that a suitable explanation is given.
Bill Braithwaite QC
Head of Exchange Chambers
This article was first published at http://billbraithwaiteqc.com/blog/
Image ©iStockphoto.com/Sohl
A Mistake on Mistake? - Paul Stanton
06/02/15. In Draper v Newport (2014) the question arose as to whether or not common law doctrines, and in this case specifically the doctrine of mistake, have any application in the MoJ protocol for low value personal injury claims (i.e.the Portal process). The claimant's solicitors (mistakenly) electronically accepted the defendant's insurer's counter-offer when they had intended to reject it. The error was recognised "almost immediately", and within half an hour the details of the mistake were communicated to the defendant's insurers.
District Judge Baker began by making reference to the overriding objective, and the need to deal with the case justly and at a proportionate cost. Having considered the skeleton arguments, and submissions from Counsel, DJ Baker found that...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/DNY59
Public Liability and Highways Claims Post-Jackson: Part 36 & Litigation Tactics - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom
27/01/15. Chapter Two from the book 'RTA Personal Injury Claims Post Jackson: A Practical Guide' by Andrew Mckie. It is clear that in relation to post-Jackson, post 31 July 2013 highways and public liability cases, the incentives for defendants and insurers to settle these cases has now been substantially reduced. These cases are now subject to portal and fixed recoverable costs, and as we have seen from the previous chapter the insurer can now run three or four of these claims to trial and lose them, for effectively the same costs as running one CFA claim to trial, with a 100% uplift under the pre-Jackson regime and losing that at trial.
This new litigation landscape of course poses enormous difficulties for claimant lawyers. The ‘50/50’ cases that previously may have been issued and then settled, before trial. This is no longer likely to happen. This means that law firms, more than ever, will have to be careful to vet claims more carefully before taking them on. To run a profitable department post-Jackson, the majority of claims will have to succeed, given there is no longer the flexibility of CFA uplifts to cushion the shortfalls of the cases that are lost at trial.
This chapter deals with using the new amendments to the CPR post April 2013 and post July 2013, when the Jacksonreforms came into effect to a) vet cases early on, b) obtain disclosure quickly, and c) settling the case before it gets to trial, and how Part 36 can encourage that.
Pre-Action Protocols
If a case exits the Low Value Portal i.e. because liability has been denied or liability has not been admitted by the defendant (or for any other reason), then the case will still fall within the personal injury Pre-Action Protocol which says...
Image cc flickr.com/photos/tranbc/6977576859/
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
| 'RTA Personal Injury Claims Post-Jackson: A Practical Guide' by Andrew Mckie ISBN: 978-0-9575530-7-1 Publication due: 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)
