This category can only be viewed by members.
Pankaj Madan examines the importance and types of rehabilitation available after brain injuries ‘Recovery from brain injury is not necessarily a linear and steadily improving process.’ In this article I will examine the issues surrounding rehabilitation in catastrophic brain injury claims and how it can be sensibly and cost-effectively managed. I will look at the …
Continue reading "Brain injury claims: Rehabilitation after catastrophic and severe brain injury"
This post is only available to members.
Katherine Deal QC reports on the first case where the Supreme Court has considered a claim under the Package Travel Regulations, which has resulted in a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ‘The Supreme Court has asked the CJEU to proceed on the assumption that in guiding X to reception, …
Continue reading "Package travel litigation: Making reference"
This post is only available to members.
Michael Dougherty looks at a recent case involving a slip on airline steps that clarifies the circumstances in which the definition of ‘accident’ is met ‘The principal question for the court was whether the circumstances giving rise to the injury were capable of comprising an accident within the meaning of Art 17.’ A slip and …
Continue reading "Airline passenger claims: ‘Accident’ in the Montreal Convention 1999"
This post is only available to members.
Richard Viney considers the practical effects of the Motor Vehicles Regulations 2019 ‘Even if an insurer did not want to avoid its own liabilities there was often little option but to do so in order to avoid being left with the entire liability for a claim, as other insurers involved avoided their own polices.’ In …
Continue reading "Motor insurance: The death of a declaration"
This post is only available to members.
Can a court award some but not all of the Part 36 consequences under CPR r36.17(4)? Harriet Wakeman discusses ‘On behalf of the defendant it was argued that the court had to approach the question of whether it was “unjust” to make the order separately in relation to each one of the four consequences, and …
Continue reading "Part 36: Pick and choose"
This post is only available to members.
Paul Jones reviews where the line is drawn between tactical and valid offers to settle ‘It was the defendant’s position that the claimant’s offer did not contain a genuine element of concession as it still included a claim for costs which negated any concession in relation to damages.’ The 78th update to the CPR in …
Continue reading "Costs: Part 36 genuine offers"
This post is only available to members.
In the face of insurers’ objections to the new discount rate, Bill Braithwaite QC explores its basic principles ‘In my opinion, when you analyse the approach by the Government Actuary and the Lord Chancellor, you can see that they have carried out an impartial and fair process, trying to do justice when faced with starkly …
Continue reading "Advocate’s advice: Nothing to complain about"
This post is only available to members.
John Schmitt provides a case update on life expectancy evidence in personal injury claims ‘Master Davison considered that bespoke life expectancy evidence from an expert in that field should be confined to cases where the relevant clinical experts cannot offer an opinion at all or state that they require specific input from a life expectancy …
Continue reading "Evidence: Call in the specialists?"
This post is only available to members.
Anthony Johnson reviews the costs position where a defendant pursues an unsuccessful counterclaim ‘Can a claimant (who may or may not have themselves pursued a personal injury claim) recover costs in the ordinary course of events or can the defendant rely upon QOCS protection deriving from their own personal injury claim?’ While the meaning and …
Continue reading "Counterclaims: QOCS – the outer limits"
This post is only available to members.
Clementine Coram James considers the factors necessary to establish causation ‘While it was natural to consider that there was a link between the significant overdose of pancuronium and the claimant’s severe neurological injury, the evidence did not establish the relevant causal connection.’ In AXO v Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust [2019], Yip J considered the issue …
Continue reading "Clinical negligence: Missing link"
This post is only available to members.
