INSOLVENCY FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS: WEBINAR 16th DECEMBER 2021
On the 16th December 2021 I am presenting a webinar “Insolvency for Personal Injury Lawyers”. In addition to the issues relating to personal insolvency the webinar will look at the latest cases in relation to third party rights against insurers…
PROVING THINGS 220: ANOTHER CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ESTABLISHED
In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB) HHJ Pearce, sitting as a judge of the High Court, did not accept the defendant’s contention that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The defendant was relying on a factor…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE RECENT CASES AND THEIR PRACTICAL RELEVANCE: WEBINAR 9th DECEMBER 2021
On the 9th December 2021 I am giving a webinar on contributory negligence. This looks at recent cases where contributory negligence has been considered in the courts and the practical lessons that litigators can learn from this. Booking details available…
MODERN SLAVERY AND THE LIABILITY OF AN INSURER: COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT INSURERS ARE LIABLE TO INDEMNIFY “EMPLOYERS” IN MODERN SLAVERY CASE
In the decision today in Komives & Anor v Hick Lane Bedding Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 3139 (QB) Mrs Justice May refused the claimants’ appeal on the issue of whether an insurer was entitled to avoid an employer’s liability…
THE NEED FOR A CLAIMANT TO PROVE INJURY: WITHOUT EVIDENCE THE ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT
The earlier post on proving causation highlights the matters that claimants need to prove when bringing a claim for damages. One essential element is that a claimant needs to prove damages. One case that shows a clear illustration of this…
THE INTOXICATED PASSENGER AND ESTABLISHING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1698 the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a claimant could be contributory negligent even when drunk. However it is important that the facts of this case are looked…
WHEN A WITNESS CHANGES A KEY PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THIS DOES NOT END WELL
In Murphy v Milton Keynes Parks Trust Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2917 (QB) HHJ Crane considered that (relatively familiar) scenario of a party giving new evidence at the date of the trial. The claimant, it must be emphasised, was…
IS A CLUB YARD A “PUBLIC PLACE”? REVERSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO INSURER DEFENDANTS
In Brown v Fisk & Ors [2021] EWHC 2769 (QB) Master Dagnall granted reverse summary jugment to an insurer defendant. This involved consideration of whether a yard was a “public place” under s.151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. THE…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WEBINAR 4th NOVEMBER 2021
On the 4th November I am giving a webinar on surveillance evidence. Booking details are available here. This webinar deals with practice and procedure in relation to the production of surveillance evidence in personal injury cases and looks at: The…
PROVING THINGS 217: WHEN AN ACCIDENT IS UNEXPLAINED: RES IPSA LOQUITUR CANNOT ASSIST
The problems of establishing liability when its cause is not certain are set out in the judgment of Mr Justice Robin Knowles in Savigar v Ainscough Crane Hire Ltd [2021] EWHC 2707 (QB). THE CASE The claimant suffered serious…
THE DUTY OF CARE OWED TO A TRESPASSER: A TRAGIC CASE CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
In Ovu v London Underground Ltd (duty of care) [2021] EWHC 2733 (QB) Master McCloud considered the duty of care owed to a trespasser. Her judgment starts with a reminder that this is a case about the death of a…
INTERIM PAYMENTS: THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
Later today I am presenting a webinar on interim payments. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss all possible permutations in relation to interim payments during a one hour slot and this post supplements the webinar. Here we look…
INTERIM PAYMENTS WHEN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Michael Lemmy for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Buttar Construction Ltd -v- Arshdeep [2021] EWCA Civ 1408. The Court considered arguments about whether an interim payment should have…
JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO ORDER DEFENDANT TO FACE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
There is another aspect of the judgment in Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) that needs consideration. The judgment on fundamental dishonesty was considered in the previous post. The defendant was unsuccessful in their appeal against the…
EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…
SUING AN IMPECUNIOUS DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE POLICY…
Every couple of years I repost the second post ever on this blog -“suing the man of straw”. The points made remain a surprise to many. An injured claimant may be able to recover unpaid damages from their own insurer….
CHILD PEDESTRIAN WAS NOT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT DECISION
In A (a minor) by her litigation friend FA -v- Akram [2021] EWHC 2467 (QB), 2021 WL 04111024 HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court judge) rejected an argument that a nine year old child had been contributory negligent. It…
SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION
In Blackpool Football Club Ltd v DSN [2021] EWCA Civ 1352 the Court of Appeal considered, and upheld, a decision on Section 33 where the discretion was exercised in favour of the claimant. This was in the context, however, of…
PERSONAL INJURY ACTION BROUGHT AFTER EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT HAS GOT WHAT IT SIGNED UP TO…
In Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd [2021] EWHC 2418 (QB) Master Dagnall rejected an argument that personal injury proceedings, brought after employment proceedings had been settled, were an abuse of process. The settlement agreement had specifically stated that it…
CLAIMANT WHO FAILED TO USE THE PORTAL WAS UNREASONABLE AND HAS TO FACE THE MUSIC: FIXED COSTS APPLY
I am grateful to Gemma Blackburn from DWF Law for bringing my attention to the judgment of Costs Judge Haworth in Harford v Music Store Professional UK/DV247 Ltd [2021] EWHC B17 (Costs). “I am satisfied that in this case…
JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND A CLAIMANT WAS NOT DISHONEST: IT MAY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO DIRECT ATTENTION TO SOLICITOR RATHER THAN THE “HAPLESS CLIENT”
In Michael v I E & D Hurford Ltd (t/a Rainbow) [2021] EWHC 2318 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacey refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where the trial judge had found the claimant not to be fundamentally dishonest. The claimant…
LIMITATION, THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: THE SINS OF THE LAWYER CANNOT NECESSARILY BE PASSED ONTO THE CLIENT
The judgment of Richard Hermer QC, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Wilkins v University Hospital North Midlands NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 2164 (QB) deals with several important elements of limitation in the context of clinical negligence. Firstly the…
DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF DISPUTES OVER WHO SHOULD BE CLAIMANT’S LITIGATION FRIEND
In HR v Aneurin Bevan University Local Health Board [2021] EWHC 2195 (Admin) Mrs Justice Foster rejected an argument that the defendant should be liable to pay the costs incurred when there was a dispute in relation to the identity…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th JULY 2021
This webinar looks at the legal principles and arguments that can be used to reduce claims for personal injury damages. It is being held on the 16th July 2021 (and available as an on-demand recording to the 16th January 2022). …
INTERIM PAYMENTS, ACCOMMODATION AND THE “EELES” CRITERIA: HIGH COURT ORDERS AND INTERIM PAYMENT OF £500,000
In AL v Collingwood Insurance & Ors [2021] EWHC 1761 (QB) Mr Justice Robin Knowles allowed a claimant’s application for a further interim payment of £500,000 to secure accommodation for a brain injured child. The case contains an important discussion…
WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 8th JULY 2021
On the 8th July 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Periodical Payments and Provisional Damages. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at the law, practice and procedure relating to provisional damages and periodical payments…
WEBINAR ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: 30th JUNE 2021
On the 30th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on accommodation and appliance claims. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here we look at the…
CARE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 25th JUNE 2021
On the 25th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Care Claims in personal injury actions. Booking details are available here. This webinar looks at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical…
DEDUCTION OF LEGAL FEES FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: SOLICITORS SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL
The decision of Mr Justice Lavender in SGI Legal LLP v Karatysz [2021] EWHC 1608 (QB) is part of the long, and continuing, battle relating to the deduction of legal fees by solicitors from claimant’s damages. In this case the…
LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2021
On the 18th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on loss of earnings claims. The material includes a client questionnaire in relation to loss of earnings and income. Booking details are available here. TOPICS COVERED BY THE…
AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: NO GREATER AMOUNT IF YOU ARE RICH: A BLAST FROM THE PAST (64 YEARS TO BE PRECISE)
Often this blog covers judgments on the day they were made. Today, however, we are going back 64 years to 1957 looking at the case of Dunhill -v- Lumby reported on the 1st February 1957 in the Times. WHY THIS…
MORE ON MULTIPLE INJURIES, THE TARIFF AND TEST CASES
Official Injuries Claims have issued a release explaining the approach to test cases and multiple injuries. This explains the collaborative approach being adopted to find test cases in claims where the injuries fall inside and outside the tariff scheme. “neither…
MULTIPLE INJURIES AND THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018: CROSS-SECTOR WORKING GROUP WORKING ON IT
An earlier post dealt with the issues relating to multiple injuries in personal injury cases where a claimant suffered multiple injuries and some of those injuries are subject to the statutory tariff scheme whilst others are not. This is clearly…
LIMITATION: SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A CLAIM FOR SEXUAL ABUSE: DISCRETION EXERCISED WHEN PROCEEDINGS ISSUED 15 YEARS OUTSIDE THE LIMITATION PERIOD
In AB v Chethams School of Music [2021] EWHC 1419 (QB) Mr Justice Fordham provides a comprehensive review of the principles the court considers when hearing an application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980, particularly in the context…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2021
A post yesterday highlighted the uncertainties and complexities in relation to awards for pain and suffering where a claimant suffered multiple injuries some inside and some outside the statutory tariff scheme. This highlights the need for lawyers to understand precisely…
HOW MUCH IS AN ARM AND A NECK? THE ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN MULTIPLE INJURY CASES AFTER THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018
The “whiplash” element of Civil Liability Act 2018 comes into force on the 31st May 2021. This introduces fixed tariff sums for damages for pain and suffering in certain road traffic claims where there has been a “whiplash” injury. A…
CLAIMANT WAS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: TO WHAT EXTENT CAN A DEFENDANT EXPLORE “PERIPHERAL” MATTERS WHEN MAKING ASSERTIONS OF DISHONESTY?
In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB)HHJ Pearce (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered, and rejected, an argument that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. In fact the claimant beat his own Part 36…
ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN “MODERN SLAVERY” CASES: EXEMPLARY AND OTHER DAMAGES CONSIDERED
In Balogh & Ors v Hick Lane Bedding Ltd [2021] EWHC 1140 (QB) Master Davison assessed damages for three claimants who were the victims of “modern slavery”. The judgment contains a helpful encapsulation of the principles involved together with three…
A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND INACCURATE STATEMENTS LEAD TO CLAIMANT LOSING £44,890
I am grateful to Aled Morris from Horwich Farrely for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Beard in Anderson -v- Porch (14th January 2021), a copy of which is available here OT APPROVED HORWICH, F38YJ633, ANDERSON, PORCH,…
A SCHEME SETTING UP COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS IS NOT SUBJECT TO WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE
There are many procedural issues considered in the judgment of TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2021] EWHC 1179 (QB). Here I want to look at one – whether the trial judge should be informed of the…
DOES A CLAIM FOR A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF PUBLIC LIABILITY CLAIMS? A JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE
I am grateful to solicitor Gareth Edwards from Mooneerams, solicitors, for providing me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Vernon, sitting at Cardiff 17th March 2021, in the case of X (a Minor) -v- MPL Home & Senza…
INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE TWO STAGE TEST IN EELES: THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
In PAL (A Child) v Davison & Ors [2021] EWHC 1108 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip considered an interim payment in the case of a seriously injured child and awarded a further interim payment of £2 million in order that suitable…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IN PURSUING A LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM: “IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CASE FOR THE COURT TO DETERMINE WHETHER PSYCHIC POWERS EXIST”
I am grateful to barrister Brian McCluggage for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Backhouse in Amdur -v- Krylov (13/04/21) a copy of which is available here E14YJ570 Amdur v Krylov final 13.4.21 (1). The judge…
SECTION 33 DISCRETION CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A SEXUAL ABUSE CLAIM
In SKX v Manchester City Council [2021] EWHC 782 (QB) Mr Justice Cavanagh considered the exercise of the discretion under Section 33 in the context of a claim for sexual abuse. The context was somewhat unusual in that the judge…
PERSONAL INJURY COSTS 2021: WATCH THE “SAINT AND GREAVSIE” OF THE COSTS BAR
My colleagues Craig Ralph and Andrew Hogan have delivered a webinar “Personal Injury Costs 2021” which is now available on the Kings Chambers website. THE WEBINAR The webinar takes you through the hot topics relating to personal injury costs. …
LIMITATION AND EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS: CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE & ACTION ISSUED WITHIN TIME
In Balls v Reeve & Anor [2021] EWHC 751 (QB) David Pittaway QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) found that the claimant’s date of knowledge was not more than three years prior to issue. THE CASE…
WEBINAR SERIES ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: STARTING JUNE 2021
In June this year I am presenting a series of six webinars which deal with major aspects of a claim for damages for personal injury. This series goes through each major element of a claim for damages, looking at…
PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION
I am grateful to Martin McKenna from Aegis solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of DDJ Morgan MBE in Johnson -v- National Platforms Ltd (a copy of which is available here Johnson v Nationwide Platforms Limited (Final))….
PROVING THINGS 194: PROVING CAUSATION IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF A CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE
The judgment of Mrs Justice Foster in Norfolk County Council v Durrant [2020] EWHC 3590 (QB) illustrates how it is essential for a claimant to prove causation in a case based on negligence. It also highlights the need to consider,…
THE MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU IS AN EMANATION OF THE STATE AND LIABLE TO MAKE PAYMENT TO A PASSENGER
In Colley v Shuker & Ors [2020] EWHC 3433 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman held that the MIB was directly liable to compensate an injured passenger in circumstances where the passenger knew that a driver was not insured. THE CASE The…
You must be logged in to post a comment.