Blogs Archive

The question of who can claim for “nervous shock” is upon us again. The issue is one which has periodically ventured as far as the House of Lords, since the decision in Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92 and, following the decision of the Court of Appeal in the conjoined cases of Paul v Royal…

In Campbell v Advantage Insurance Co [2021] EWCA Civ 1698 the Court of Appeal has given guidance on the assessment of passengers’ contributory negligence in drink-driver cases.  The Facts Dean Brown had driven the claimant, Lyum Campbell, and Dean’s brother, Aaron Brown, to a club. All three consumed significant quantities of alcohol and in the…

It is not uncommon for a losing party to be disgruntled by the outcome of his/her case. However, the majority of the time, the findings of fact which have brought a judge to their conclusion will be unimpeachable and the reasons given, whilst potentially contrary to the beliefs of the losing party, will be sufficiently…

What approach should the court take when there is a fundamental dispute of fact between an individual’s recollection given in witness evidence and contemporaneous medical records? This was the issue in the trial of HTR v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 3228 (QB), heard by Cotter J between 5 and 7 October 2021.…

On 19 November 2021 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in an important decision on an employer’s liability claim for damages for personal injury suffered by an Assistant Head Teacher who was assaulted by a pupil. Dingemans LJ gave the sole reasoned judgment, with which Andrews and Arnold LJJ agreed, dismissing the Claimant’s appeal…

On Friday 12 November 2021, HHJ Melissa Clarke, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, dismissed the claim of Terence Ward. Mr Ward sought damages for lung cancer which he contended had been caused by exposure to asbestos in the course of two periods of employment, the first with Burroughs Wellcome & Co between 1969…

In Castello v Gonschior [2021] EWHC 2742 (QB), Lambert J provides an important reminder of the importance of choosing the right experts and an example of the relevance, or lack of relevance, of complaints by other patients, and the evidential principles of “res ipsa loquitur” and Keefe v The Isle of Man Steam Packet Co Ltd [2010]…

On 3 November 2021 the newly appointed Ritchie J handed down his judgment in Haggerty-Garton v ICI [2021] EWHC 2924 (QB), a mesothelioma case brought in the High Court but, pursuant to a consent order agreed between the First Claimant and the Defendant, subject to Scottish law. The Claimant was the young widow of David Haggerty,…

A claim is being brought against the Rugby Football League (RFL) by a group of 10 ex-professional rugby league players. The claim follows on from the announcement that in December 2020 a letter of claim had been sent in respect of rugby union players considered in this blog. This discussed the news that Rylands Law are…

The first edition of ‘Controlling Noise at Work’ was published in 1998, and was founded on the earlier Noise at Work Regulations 1989. It was comprehensively revised in 2005 in advance of the enactment of the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 from 6 April 2006. Minor amendments to the Regulations, and the passage of…

The Court of Appeal handed down judgment last month allowing the Defendant’s appeal against the decision of Martin Spencer J in the case of Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd. The High Court decision is discussed in the author’s blog entitled “The Limitations of Challenging Uncontroverted Expert Evidence”, which can be read here. The decision of the Court of…

Civil practitioners dealing with personal injury claims are generally familiar with the three-year limitation period imposed by section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980. Put simply, claims for personal injury (whether arising from negligence, nuisance or breach of duty) must be brought within three years of the date on which the cause of action accrued…