EXPERT WATCH 44: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EVIDENCE OF ONE EXPERT OVER ANOTHER: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT…
Here we have a case where success for the claimant rested almost wholly on their expert evidence being accepted. This is not altogether unusual for a clinical negligence case. What is notable about this case is that the treating doctor…
CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
A post yesterday highlighted both the significance of a claim for loss of earnings for a child claimant, but also the difficulty. In that case the award for disability in the labour market of £50,000 was higher than the award…
PROVING THINGS 283: FAILING TO ESTABLISH A CLAIM FOR PROVISIONAL DAMAGES FOR ONE SET OF SYMPTOMS BUT ESTABLISHING IT IN ANOTHER
There are relatively few judgments in which the law and practice relating to provisional damages are considered in detail. We have such a case here. Further it is an example of the claimant failing to establish provisional damages in relation…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 7: CLAIM FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AS A RESULT OF BEING PRESENT AT BIRTH WAS STRUCK OUT: TESTING THE PARAMETERS OF PAUL -v- WOLVERHAMPTON
This case represents an attempt to sidestep the decision in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1. As we shall see it was not successful. This is one of the first, if not the first, reported case since…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: STATISTICAL RISK REDUCTION DOES NOT SATISFY THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Establishing causation is a key element of many clinical negligence cases. Here we have a case where the issue of causation was put in two ways: the “but for” test and alternatively the “indivisible injury” test. The claimant did not…
CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: “WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH”
Here we are looking at some of the observations made by Lord Burrows in the recent judgment given by the Supreme Court. In the short term it is good news for seriously injured child claimants. However Lord Burrows has laid…
LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY
The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child. The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances. This post…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured. In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…
INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL
The interest rates payable on Court Fund accounts have decreased. THE CHANGES The changes are announced here. They took effect on the 9th January 2026. Special Account – decreased from 4.00% to 3.75% Basic Account – decreased from 3.00%…
EXPERT WATCH 29: THE JUDGE IS WARY OF A CLINICAL EXPERT WHO IS “HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF LITIGATION”
There have been a number of cases in recent years where judges have been wary (sometimes highly sceptical) of expert witnesses who make their living solely from being involved in litigation. We have another example here. There is no indication…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6 : CAUSATION WHEN THE INJURIES OCCURRED BEFORE THE NEGLIGENCE: THE BREACHES MADE NO DIFFERENCE TO THE OUTCOME
Practitioners in every field of litigation need to be aware of the need to prove causation in addition to breach. This requirement can sound particularly harshly in clinical negligence. We see an example here. There were some breaches of the…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42: THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A “DENIAL”: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED
This is the first of two interesting cases today that have been sent in by readers. I am grateful to Rebecca McVety of the Dental Law Partnership for sending me this judgment which deals with pleadings, in particular the very…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 5: ANOTHER CASE OF “WHAT WAS SAID?” AND “WHY WASN’T THAT PARTICULAR POINT IN THE MEDICAL NOTES?”
Here we have a clinical negligence case with a familiar issue. The trial depended on whose account the judge accepted of what was said in a particular medical consultation several years earlier. The treating doctor can, in reality, remember little…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND CONTEMPT OF COURT: CLAIMANT BROUGHT A FRAUDULENT £3 MILLION CLAIM: SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT IMPOSED
This blog has looked at cases of fundamental dishonesty many times. It has to be remembered that, more often than not, bringing dishonest claims is also contempt of court. This case deals with the appropriate sentence that should be passed…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025
You may be reading this for the second time – but it may be partly your own fault.… This webinar looks at the law relating to contributory negligence, the legislation and the key cases. Booking details are available here. …
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: A SERIES OF THREE WEBINARS THAT LOOK AT THE LAW AND PRACTICE IN DETAIL
Contributory negligence is one of the “Cinderella” subjects of legal practice. It is often alleged and often conceded. However the underlying principles that the courts apply are rarely looked at, let alone systematically. This is an important area because –…
EXPERT WATCH 24: WHEN AN EXPERT IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE “BOLAM” TEST (WHICH IS REFERRED TO IN THEIR OWN REPORT)THIS IS NOT DETERMINATIVE: BUT IT DOESN’T HELP
This is not the first time we have looked at a case where an expert in a clinical negligence has revealed in cross-examination that they do no really understand the “Bolam” test for negligence. We look at such a case…
SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT
This is a case about mistakes in litigation and the rules relating to allowing the withdrawal of a pre-action admission. The judgment was given 10 years ago, but arrived on BAILII today. The issues raised here remain highly relevant. In…
SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?
We are looking again at the case in which the claimant applied for permission to withdraw their Part 36 offer. The claimant had capacity, however at the hearing it was argued that he came within the definition of “vulnerable” litigant…
SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? IS A “CHANGE OF MIND” A “CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES”: THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
There are few cases which involve a claimant seeking to withdraw their own Part 36 offer we have a decision today here. The claimant made an offer and attempted to withdraw is shortly afterwards. The defendant accepted the offer within…
SOME MORE INFORMATION ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND PERRIN -v- WALSH: FURTHER STATEMENTS; WARNINGS TO THE EXPERTS AND COSTS
This case was covered in a previous post. There is a useful article on the case by the claimant’s counsel. This covers the orders made in relation to further evidence from the surveillance operatives, the warnings given to the medical…
SHOULD THE DEFENDANT BE ORDERED TO PAY THE CLAIMANT’S COSTS WHEN IT RAN AN UNSUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT AS TO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY? A HIGH COURT DECISION
There has been much debate recently about whether assertions of fundamental dishonesty have been made too readily. This case makes it clear that there may be costs consequences for those who run such arguments but who do not succeed. This…
EXPERT WATCH 19: THE EXPERT WHO WAS “FIGHTING HIS CORNER RATHER THAN TAKING A DISPASSIONATE APPROACH TO THE ISSUES RAISED”
Here we look at the judge’s views as to the approach taken by experts in a clinical negligence case. The judge clearly preferred the approach of one expert to that of another. One expert was “fighting his corner” rather than…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 4: THE DANGERS OF PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE WITHOUT APPROPRIATE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT (LESSONS HERE FOR ALL LITIGATORS)
There have been several cases dealing with inadequate pleading in clinical negligence cases this year. Here we look at one of them. It is a case we have looked at already but I wanted to emphasise the point. Further this…
THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)
Here we are considering a case that covers issues relating to clinical negligence, the drafting of pleadings and wasted costs. It gives much to think about, particularly for those bringing professional negligence actions. (Choose the right type of doctor before…
ANONYMITY AND REPORTING RESTRICTIONS IN CIVIL CASES (2): THE PROCESS THAT JUDGE’S SHOULD FOLLOW WHEN CONSIDERING THESE ISSUES
The previous post looked at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in relation to applications for anonymity in civil cases. Here we take a close look at the factors that the courts have to consider when an application for anonymity…
COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY ON ANONYMITY AND REPORTING RESTRICTION ORDERS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES BROUGHT BY CHILDREN AND PROTECTED PARTIES
This is the first of several posts that will look at the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to the principles concerning applications for anonymity and reporting restrictions on children and protected parties involved in litigation. Here was have…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 3: ABSENT DOCTORS AND ADVERSE INFERENCES (SOMETHING TO CONSIDER FOR ALL LITIGATORS HERE…)
Today we are looking at a case where the judge considered whether adverse inferences should be drawn when a relevant expert was not called to give evidence at trial. This issue of what matters the court can properly conclude when…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 28: WHY THE PROPOSED AMENDED PARTICULARS DID NOT SAVE THE CLAIMANT: “MERE ASSERTION IS NOT SUFFICIENT”
We are continuing to examine the case looked at in the previous post. The claimant, faced with an application that the amended Particulars of Claim did not comply with the requirements of a court order, or the rules, made an…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 2: OVER TWO WEEKS IN COURT, A PANOPALY OF EXPERTS – BUT THE CASE CAME DOWN TO “WHO SAID WHAT TO WHO?”
The principles relating to clinical negligence cases are well known. The major problem is usually determining the facts. In cases that involve a disputed recollection of what was said and asked in medical consultations this gives rise to major issues. …
DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH AND DAMAGES FOR LOSSES PRIOR TO DEATH: WEBINAR 15th JULY 2025
This webinar deals with some of the most sensitive and difficult issues that a litigator may have to deal with. It looks a law and practice relating to losses incurred prior to death. Booking details are available here. ISSUES COVERED…
GENERAL DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY: THE KEY ISSUES CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 9th JULY 2025
How do awards for pain and suffering for psychiatric injuries differ, if at all, to damages for physical injuries. What does the court do when there are physical and psychiatric injuries? What happens if there are multiple injuries? These are…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 1: ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT HELPS IF THE PSLA IS IN THE SCHEDULE
It is relatively rare for litigators to get a detailed insight into the court’s approach to an award for pain and suffering. We see any example here. Of course every case is fact specific, but practitioners have to be aware…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 4th JUNE 2025
This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to periodical payments and periodical payments, including an interesting negligence case brought against solicitors who failed to claim provisional damages. Booking details are available here. It then looks at the…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 6: HOW IS THE COURT GOING TO APPROACH THE COSTS OF ACCOMMODATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS A REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY – & HOW DOES THE COURT DEAL WITH THIS ON AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT?
The decision in Swift -v- Carpenter set out the approach the courts should normally take when a claimant needs to purchase accommodation because of their injuries. However that judgment, expressly, left open issues relating to the approach the courts should take…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 11: THE COURT WON’T STRIKE OUT PARTS OF THE DEFENCE BECAUSE… ITS ACTUALLY THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM THAT DON’T MAKE MUCH SENSE
NB – SEE THE APPEAL JUDGMENT ON ONE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IN Prudence v Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] EWHC 96 (KB) Here we are looking at a judgment that is all about statements of case (or at…
THE WITNESS STATEMENT “IS IN LARGE PART UNRELIABLE AND ALSO LACKS CREDIBILITY”: THE ENDURING PROBLEM OF “RETROSPECTIVE RECONSTRUCTION”
We have looked many times at the problems caused by witness statements, including when a witness “tries” to remember matters they really cannot, or reconstructs what they feel did happen (or should have happened). This is a feature of all…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2025
“We go back through your claim in fine detail and if we find that your previous solicitor wasn’t thorough enough and your claim was mishandled, we’ll squeeze out all the compensation that you’re entitled to, getting you more money, and…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 21st MAY 2025
A defendant is entitled to make a Part 36 offer whenever it wants. The making of an early offer can cause major problems for claimants and their lawyers. An understanding of the rules, the relevant cases and the steps that…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: A WEBINAR (& CHECKLIST): 14th MAY 2025
There are many ways in which a court can approach a claim for loss of earnings. There are as many ways in which a claim for loss of earnings can go wrong. In recent weeks I have written about cases…
JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS “INCOHERENT” AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM
It is an easy matter for a claimant to insert a claim for a substantial loss of earnings into a schedule of damages. However a claimant then has to prove that loss. Further, even prior to trial, a defendant is…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2025
Much of the task of the claimant lawyer concentrates on the task of building up the claim for damages to ensure proper compensation. However it is essential that the lawyer if fully aware of the arguments, case law and principles…
COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A “SHORT CUT” TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY’S DAMAGES
A solicitor who wishes to deduct “solicitor and own client” costs in a case involving a minor or protected party requires approval by the Court. Here we have a case where the claimant’s solicitors argued, robustly, that the current process…
RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025
Practitioners can learn a lot from looking at judgments on claims for loss of earnings. These provide a practical grounding of how the courts approach such claims and, in particular, how judges consider the evidence (or absence of evidence) in…
ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: THE CASES SINCE SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: WEBINAR 15th APRIL 2025
Issues relating to accommodation costs and aids and appliances feature in many moderate to serious personal injury cases. There are relatively few cases where the principles governing damages are considered. This webinar looks at the principles and the practical steps…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN, SUFFERING AND LOSS OF AMENITY: RECENT CASES AND LESSONS TO LEARN FROM THEM: WEBINAR 8th APRIL 2025
Awards for pain and suffering are made in every personal injury case. However the law and principles relating to these awards are rarely considered by practitioners. This webinar takes a close look at recent awards to enable practitioners to know,…
PROVING DAMAGES – THE CLAIMANT LAWYER’S BASIC TASK: WEBINAR 19th MARCH 2025
The “Proving Things” series on this blog is now up to number 256. The vast majority of this series is, in fact, about not proving things. That is where litigants fail to bring sufficient (sometimes any) evidence to court to prove…
AGENCY FEES AND MEDICAL REPORTS: JUDGE REFUSES TO ALLOW AGENCY PROFIT ELEMENT OF THE FEE: ANOTHER ROUND IN A CONTINUING BATTLE
I am grateful to Howard Dean of Keoghs, solicitors, for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Morris in Smith -v- Portsmouth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, a copy of which is available here. It is a case…
SERIES OF 10 WEBINARS ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: AND YOU CAN BUY A “SEASON TICKET”
The APIL Damages Series is 10 webinars looking at key elements of law and practice relating to personal injury damages. The webinars can be bought and watched individually. APIL has a special offer for all 10, details available here. …
INTERIM PAYMENTS WHERE ONLY 50% OF DAMAGES ARE LIKELY TO BE RECOVERED: IS A HEAD OF FUTURE LOSS LIKELY TO BE CAPITALISED?
In Lexi-Rae Speirs v St Georges University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2025] EWHC 337 (KB) Senior Master Cook considered the question of how the court should approach an application for an interim payment in a case where the claimant was only…
You must be logged in to post a comment.