THE TREATMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: ANOTHER CASE WHERE A JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF A DEFENDANT IS OVERTURNED
There has been much online discussion about the impact that the decision in Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) will have in relation to food poisoning cases and more generally. That case related specifically to the treatment of…
COVID-19 Clinical Negligence Protocol 2020
A Protocol has been introduced between SCIL, NHS Resolution and AVMA, which deals with the conduct of personal injury litigation. Details can be found here. SUMMARY The press release has a useful summary “The protocol is wide-ranging, covering: moratoriums…
PROVING THINGS 180: ACCEPTING A LIFT WITH A DRUNKEN DRIVER, WHILST DRUNK: DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT FAILING TO WEAR A SEAT BELT MADE A DIFFERENCE
The judgment today of HHJ Robinson (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2020] EWHC 2210 (QB) makes interesting reading. 1. A claimant cannot properly argue that he was too drunk himself…
HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIMANT’S PERSONAL INJURY ACTION (AND CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AS WELL)
In Akay v Newcastle University [2020] EWHC 1669 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender upheld an earlier decision that a personal injury action be struck out as an abuse of process. “If it was to be alleged that the judge failed…
THE 8TH EDITION OF THE ‘OGDEN TABLES’ AND THEIR PRACTICAL IMPACT: WEBINAR 31st JULY 2020
I am presenting a webinar on the 31st July 2020 dealing with the new Actuarial Tables. THE CONTENT The government’s new ‘Actuarial Tables’ were published on 17th July 2020. The webinar takes us through the significant changes introduced…
THE MULTIPLIERS THEY ARE A CHANGING: 8th EDITION OF THE “OGDEN TABLES”
The 17th July saw the publication of the latest (the 8th) edition of the Government Actuary’s Department “Actuarial Tables” “With explanatory notes for use in Personal Injury and Fatal Accident Cases”. This may be particularly frustrating for those who were…
DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES AND MITIGATION OF LOSS IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WEBINAR 11th AUGUST 2020 (& THEN AVAILABLE ON DEMAND)
On the 11th August 2020 I am presenting a webinar “Deductions from Damages and Mitigation of Loss”. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at those matters that could reduce the damages a claimant receives in a personal injury case, looking…
CLAIMS FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES, CARE AND WORK AROUND THE HOME: WEBINAR 23rd JULY 2020
On the 23rd July 2020 I am conducting a webinar “Claims for Medical Expenses, Care and Work around the Home”. This webinar looks at damages in relation to medical expenses and care. It covers the whole range of care claims,…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 78: NO DUTY ON AN INJURED CLAIMANT TO USE THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
This post is due to a tweet someone copied me in on this morning. The issue was, ostensibly, one of general damages in a personal injury case. An insurer was refusing to pay the costs of private treatment – stating…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: LAW, PRACTICE AND THE KEY CASES
On the 17th July 2020 I am presenting a webinar on periodical payments and provisional damages. THE WEBINAR Periodical payments and provisional damages have been a part of the legal landscape for some time now. A knowledge of the…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: WEBINAR 7th JULY 2020
On the 7th July 2020 I am presenting a webinar on contributory negligence in personal injury actions and clinical negligence cases. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE Contributory negligence is a common feature of personal injury litigation and (sometimes) in clinical negligence cases….
CHANGE TO THE SPECIAL ACCOUNT RATE: DOWN TO 0.1%: PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
This morning the Ministry of Justice announced a reduction of interest rates for the Courts Funds special and basic accounts, effective from today (1st June 2020). THE ANNOUNCEMENT “Due to the impact of Covid-19, the Bank England reduced the base…
THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO GIVE A RANGE OF OPINION: A DECISION NOT TO DO SO “BORDERING ON ARROGANCE”
Experts have a mandatory duty under the rules to give a range of opinion for their advices. I am grateful to Gary Smith from Prince Evans & Co for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Belcher in…
ASSESSING DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WHEN THE JUDGES GO “BACK TO BASICS” (AND WHY IT MATTERS)
I am giving a webinar on Thursday on “The Fundamentals of Personal Injury Damage”. The starting point is the “basic” element of personal injury damages – to put the claimant back in the position they would be if they had…
THE FUNDAMENTALS OF PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2020
I am giving a webinar on the 7th May 2020 – 12.00 – 13.00 on the fundamentals of personal injury damages. Many practitioners engage daily in the assessment of personal injury damages without a detailed knowledge of the fundamental principles,…
BOOK REVIEW: GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS
I have been sent a copy of the 3rd edition of the Guide to Catastrophic Injury Claims by Stuart McKechnie QC and others. I can review it briefly. This is a book that needs to be on your shelf if…
PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Chamberlain in BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) that merits attention. Th claimant sought damage for loss of earnings but these…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR
The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…
63 YEARS OLD AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES – MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES – THE WRITING PROCESS
An earlier post looked at the previous 13 editions of Munkman on Damages for Personal Injury and Death, together with photos. Since more people read law books than write them I thought it would be of interest to describe the…
PERSONAL INJURY CASES WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND HAS NO ASSETS: LOOK TO THE CLAIMANT’S OWN INSURANCE POLICY
Periodically I repeat the second ever post on this blog. This related to the (surprising to many) fact that it may be possible for a claimant with an unsatisfied judgment to recover damages from their own domestic insurance policy. …
63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES – ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)
The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press. This is the 14th edition, the first being written in 1956. In this post I look at the history of the book…
APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages. This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…
FALL DOWN AIRCRAFT STEPS WAS AN “ACCIDENT”: HIGH COURT DECISION
Several posts last week dealt with claims relating to aircraft and the limitation period. The Montreal Convention was considered in Labbadia v Alitalia (Societa Aerea Italiana SPA) [2019] EWHC 2103 (QB). (One essential point to take home is that this…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 4: AVIATION, PLANES, AIRPORTS AND BALLOONS: VICIOUS RULES APPLY
This is the fourth in the series. The purpose of this post is to make you feel really uncomfortable when you are involved with a case that involves aviation and personal injury, in any way shape or form. Including when…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?
This series looks at avoiding negligence claims in litigation, personal injury litigation in particular. The easiest (and most common) method of a negligence claim is missing the limitation period. How does anyone miss a three year limitation period? The basic…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019
I am giving a webinar on the 10th September 2019: “CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT!” CONTENT The webinar will cover: The law as to loss of earnings How a claim for…
THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITOR IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION: IDEAS TAKEN FROM THE SECRET BARRISTER
There was a tweet yesterday from someone (a non-lawyer) asserting that personal injury lawyers did not need to know the law. His purpose, I suspect, was to lead on to an argument that the work could be done by someone…
BREACH OF REGULATIONS IS IPSO FACTO NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON s.69 OF THE ERRA
I am grateful to Colm Nugent for sending me a copy of the judgment of HH Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Tonkins -v- Tapp (7th December 2018). The judgment deals with the issue of the relevance…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 24: THE BANKRUPT CLAIMANT (PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANTS IN PARTICULAR)
I am writing this primarily because of a conversation I had with a law graduate who thought the term “bankruptcy” was a generic term to cover anyone who was hard up. The very basic point about what bankruptcy is, and…
NOT TELLING THE CLAIMANT THE AMOUNT OF HIS DAMAGES: JUDICIAL APPROVAL OBTAINED
In EXB v FDZ & Ors [2018] EWHC 3456 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett had to consider the approach of the court when it was felt to in the claimant’s best interests not to be told of the size of his award…
LIMITATION: COURT DOES NOT EXERCISE SECTION 33 IN CASE CONCERNING ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE: A CAUSE OF ACTION CANNOT BE PUT ON THE SHELF
This is the second post of the day on Section 33. In Murray v Devenish & Ors (Sons of the Sacred Heart of Jesus) [2018] EWHC 1895 (QB) the claimant was not successful. Mr Justice Nicol held that the claimant’s delay…
FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 8: MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION
This was a series in 2017. Looking at common “myths” or misconceptions in relation to limitation issues, particularly in personal injury cases. MYTHUSTING 1 The limitation period for a personal injury action based on breach of contract is…
“NOTHING SHORT OF A RECOGNISED PSYCHIATRIC INJURY CAN AMOUNT TO A PERSONAL INJURY”: SECTION 33 CANNOT APPLY WHERE THE CLAIMANTS SUFFERED “FEAR”
The judgment of Mr Justice Stewart in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 1305 (QB) (24 May 2018) considers the question of what is an “injury” for the purpose of Section 33 of the Limitation Act…
BOOK REVIEW: AN INTRODUCTION TO PERSONAL INJURY LAW
I reviewed David Boyle’s book on expert evidence earlier in the year. He has presumably decided to forego all forms of social interaction and has now written a general introduction to Personal Injury. The book places some emphasis on the…
REVISITING COMPLIANCE WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER AFTER TRIAL: LIES ARE FOUND OUT AND ACTION DISMISSED
I am grateful to Jeff Turton of Weightmans for sending me a copy of the transcript in the case of Anward -v- Severn Trent Water Ltd (13th July 2015). Abid Anwar – Full Judgment It raises an interesting and important point…
LIMITATION AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: WHAT IS MEANT BY "SIGNIFICANT"?
In Summers -v- The City and County of Cardiff [2015] EWHC 3066 (QB) Mr Justice Hickinbottom considered what was meant by “significant” in s.14(1) of the Limitation Act 1980. “The test for “significance” of injury is one of quantum alone,…
THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33: A CASE THAT CLINICAL AND PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS PROBABLY NEED TO READ
In Rayner -v- Wolferstans & Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2957 (QB) Mr Justice Wilkie carried out a comprehensive review of the law relating to date of knowledge and Section 33 of the Limitation Action 1980. It also touches…
BANKRUPTCY AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANT: 10 KEY POINTS
The post about Eatons -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC led to some interesting discussions and raises some important issues. The claimant had been made bankrupt after he was injured. His lawyers overlooked this, issued proceedings, succeeded in a trial on…
SETTING OFF INTEREST AGAINST AN INTERIM PAYMENT: A HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Manna -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2279 (QB) is a veritable goldmine for anyone who writes about civil procedure or personal injury damages. One of the, many, issues…
DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33 IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In A -v- The Trustees of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society [2015] EWHC 1722 (QB) Mr Justice Globe considered the issue of the date of knowledge under s.14 of the Limitation Act 1980 and also stated that, had it…
COSTS AFTER VARIATION OF A PART 36 OFFER TO BE LESS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE RECIPIENT: BURRETT -v- MENCAP CONSIDERED
The decision of District Judge Ackroyd in Burreett -v- Mencap Ltd (14th May 2014) was reported on Lawtel earlier this week and is available on Bailli. It contains an important lesson to both defendants and claimants as to costs when…
SECTION 33 AND “LONG TAIL CLAIMS”: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND RELEVANCE OF DELAY BETWEEN THE BREACH AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE
In Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 717 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate legal test for the date of knowledge and exercise of the section 33 discretion when an…
LIMITATION: THE ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST: BACK TO THE FUTURE AT WORK
This is the second “essential checklist” compiled at a recent course held by Zenith Chambers. In this workshop practitioners (primarily solicitors), of all levels and type of experience, were asked to produce checklists for the “danger” areas of practice….
TEN MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD KNOW.
There are a surprising number of “myths” that prevail in personal injury litigation. In particular in relation to limitation. Here, as part of the “avoiding negligence” series we look at 10 of these myths. Myth 1: In a breach of…
INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANT: SOMEWHERE TO LIVE OR DOWN AT EELES?
Cases and principles relating to interim payments and accommodation in catastrophic injury cases are considered. Prior to the decision in Cobham Hire Services –v- Eeles [2009] EWCA Civ 204 it was a relatively simple matter to obtain a substantial interim…
You must be logged in to post a comment.