September 2019 #178 – Law Journals

Pathological grief disorders: Parental psychiatric injuries

Julian Matthews examines some of the interesting legal issues arising in claims by parents for their own psychiatric conditions secondary to injuries to their children ‘The starting point for any legal analysis is that although it is foreseeable that a person who has witnessed an accident in which a loved one is killed or severely …

Continue reading "Pathological grief disorders: Parental psychiatric injuries"

This post is only available to members.

Reasonable care: Slipping claims and evidential burdens

Thomas Herbert summarises the case law and considers the burden of proof required ‘Where the evidence demonstrates that the spillage had only been present for a short time, the defendant will likely escape liability.’ The law in slipping cases is, in theory, settled and straightforward. One question that often arises in practice, however, is whether …

Continue reading "Reasonable care: Slipping claims and evidential burdens"

This post is only available to members.

ATE insurance: Recoverable premiums and proportionality

K K

Nick McDonnell outlines the Court of Appeal’s ruling on the recoverability of block-rated ATE premiums in low-value clinical negligence cases ‘The Court of Appeal, in exploring the law and practice of such a premium’s proportionality, sought also, for the first time, to provide general guidance on the post-April proportionality test on costs.’ The 17 July …

Continue reading "ATE insurance: Recoverable premiums and proportionality"

This post is only available to members.

Advocate’s advice: Nothing to complain about

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.

Evidence: Call in the specialists?

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.

Counterclaims: QOCS – the outer limits

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.

Clinical negligence: Missing link

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.

Costs: Provisional assessment problems

Paul Jones looks at a recent case that highlights the difficulties that arise when the court rules and practice directions are at odds ‘The Master concluded that the Practice Direction does no more than set out procedural requirements for provisional assessment and does not have any effect on the jurisdiction to conduct that assessment.’ One …

Continue reading "Costs: Provisional assessment problems"

This post is only available to members.