Disease Blogs Archive

The single joint expert’s decision can often have a decisive effect upon the viability and outcome of a given claim, particularly a disease claim. If the expert’s opinion is unfavourable, the aggrieved party will want to try and salvage the position. Unfortunately, given how busy single joint experts often are, by the time the report…

Master Davison closed the door, firmly, on costs budgeting in the Asbestos List in Smith v W Ford & Sons (Contractors) Ltd [2021] EWHC 1749 (QB). Philip Turton reports on the decision. The judgment can be read here. It has long been the practice in the Asbestos List to dispense with costs budgeting. In living mesothelioma claims…

In this blog, Nik Arora reviews the decision in Moutarde v SIG Logistics to limit the Claimant’s success fee in a mesothelioma claim to 27.5%. Q. When is a trial not a trial? A. When it’s a discrete dispute about costs. In the case of Moutarde v SIG Logistics [2021] EWHC 1670 (QB) Calver J refused…

Show me that you can divide the notes of a song; But first, show me that you can discern Between what can be divided And what cannot. An anonymous musical composition inspired by a classical Sanskrit poem.1 Introduction Two questions that often arise in disease litigation are whether a condition is divisible or indivisible and…

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Concussion in Sport Inquiry committee has been holding consultations with leading experts, former professional sports athletes, the Chief Medical Officers and Chief Executives of Sports Governing Bodies as well as charities and campaigners to fully investigate brain injury in sport. The authors recently explored gender differences in…

This blog looks back to the Supreme Court’s decision in Baker v Quantum Clothing Group Ltd [2011] 1 WLR 1003 and discuss how the concepts of risk and acceptable limits of exposure now operate in modern-day disease litigation. NIHL and the Code of Practice for Reducing Exposure of Employed Persons to Noise 1972 It is ten years…

A good month for claimants in historic asbestos claims continues. Coming shortly after Scarborough College Ltd v Winter [2021] EWHC 1549 (QB), in which a Show Cause finding in a claimant’s favour was undisturbed on appeal (as discussed by Philip Godfrey and Alexandra Pountney recently on this blog), Sparkes v London Pension Funds Authority & Leigh Academies…

The issue of concussion in sport is frequently in the news at the moment. The risks and consequences of concussion have been highlighted in rugby, football, boxing and many other sports. However, the vast majority of these issues have been focussed on male participants. However, a recent study available on the JAMA network, a free…

In Scarborough College Ltd v Winter [2021] EWHC 1549 (QB), the High Court considered an appeal by a Defendant against the decision of a Master to enter judgment under CPR PD3D (the show cause procedure). The appeal was dismissed. Cavanagh J held that Judgment had been appropriately entered. The Facts The Claimant, now deceased, was a…

Freedman J’s decision in Mather v Ministry of Defence [2021] EWHC 811 (QB) – which can be read here – is interesting for (at least) two reasons. First, it demonstrates the court’s reluctance to order a preliminary issue trial in a complex and novel claim. Secondly, it foreshadows what promises to be a significant disease trial…

On 25 March 2021 the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (“IIAC”) published “COVID-19 and occupation: position paper 48” – found here. It will be of interest to disease and personal injury practitioners alike, and a great many other people besides. On 1 April 2021 the BBC reported that: “About one in five people have symptoms of long Covid five weeks…

On 4 March 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“the CJEU”) handed down judgment in Commission v UK (Limit Values – Nitrogen Dioxide) [2021] EUECJ C-664/18. The CJEU declared that the UK had breached certain of its obligations under Directive 2008/50 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe, which entered…