Publications by Area of Law


Losing out on the lost years

Source: New Law Journal 
Barrister:
David Regan
Area of Law: 
Personal Injury
Date: 11th May 2018
Summary: David Regan, has written an article for the New Law Journal titled ‘Losing out on the lost years’ in the 11 May 2018 issue. The article reviews the developing law on claims for earnings for lost years, and the likelihood that the Supreme Court would allow children to make such claims.  This would have a significant impact on all claims for children whose lives are shortened by negligence.

Download article: Losing out on the lost years

Supreme Court hold Local Authority vicariously liable for abuse by foster parents

Barrister: Marcus Coates-Walker
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Summary: Marcus Coates-Walker, reports on the recent case of Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council [2017] UKSC 60, regarding care of the appellant by the respondent local authority from the ages of 7 to 18.

View/download full article: Supreme Court hold Local Authority vicariously liable for abuse by foster parents

What does the new edition of the Judicial College Guidelines 2017 bring?

Barrister: Rachel Segal
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Date: 18th September 2017
Summary: Rachel has published an article on the long-awaited fourteenth edition of the Judicial College Guidelines (for the Assessment of Damages in Personal Injuries). The guidelines were published on 14th September 2017 (and is already available via Lawtel).

So what does the new edition bring?

There are no obvious significant changes in the guidelines and there is unlikely to be any need for a wholesale re-think of the valuation of most ongoing claims. As expected, all brackets have been adjusted upwards to a modest extent, reflecting the average 4.8% RPI increase since the committee finalised the previous edition. For example, minor neck injuries falling within the bracket 7(A)(c)(ii) will attract up to £3,810 (with the Simmons v Castle uplift) or £3,470 (without), compared to £3,630 or £3,300 respectively in the 13th edition. There might be some short term pain for defendants in low value MOJ Stage 3 assessments where portal offers have been made with regard to the 13th edition (although the balance to this is that the tariff system may well be implemented prior to the 15th edition of the guidelines).

In terms of any noteworthy updates, there is the abandonment of different brackets for scarring according to whether the injured person is male or female. This has an impact on the application of Chapters 9 (Facial Injuries) and 10 (Scarring to Other Parts of the Body). The subjective views of the injured person in respect of the scarring remains a focus for assessing quantum in those cases.

There is no separate category for persistent vegetative state (PVS) although this is provided for in a new way in the Brain and Head Injury brackets at Chapter 3 (A)(a) (Very Severe Brain Damage) and 3(A)(b) (Moderately Severe Brain Damage). The new guidelines suggest that while 3(A)(a) is the likely http://premier-pharmacy.com/product/xenical/ bracket (at the lower end) for PVS with life expectancy in excess of 15 years, 3(A)(b) provides for cases where there is a permanent vegetative state with severely reduced life expectancy. The 14th edition also indicates that cases where there is a persistent vegetative state and death occurs very soon after the injuries were suffered the award will be solely for loss of amenity and will fall below the bracket at 3(A)(b) (this contrasts particularly with the guidance at the end of 3(A)(a) of the 13th edition).

Mr Justice Langstaff chairs the JCG Committee that produces these guidelines. In his very useful new introduction he makes reference inter alia to the weight given to duration of any symptoms in minor injuries, suggesting that the often linear approach proposed by many advocates (and adopted by many district and deputy district judges) that focuses too casually on duration might not always be appropriate. This is a welcome comment, particularly for situations where there appears to be a disconnect between the objective findings of the medical expert on examination, the reported effects on the claimant, and the prognosis given.

There is also a useful reminder for judges and practitioners alike that the Guidelines are what they say on the tin, and “not tramlines”. There is clearly room for meaningful argument in both directions.

In his foreword, Irwin LJ makes apt reference to the uncertain and ever-changing politico-legal context in which the new Guidelines appear, not least the UK exit from the EU and concomitant Great Repeal Bill (however that evolves), and the advent of the electronic civil court all under the watch of the fourth non-lawyer Lord Chancellor. There are indeed interesting times ahead.

Catalano v Espley-Tyas Development Group Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1132

Barrister: Darren Lewis

Darren analyses the recent Court of Appeal case of Catalano v Espley-Tyas Development Group Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1132, which overturns the Court’s findings in the case of Julie Casseldine v Diocese of Llandaff Board for Social Responsibility (a charity) (2015).

Click here to read the full case: Catalano v Espley-Tyas Development Group Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1132

Read the full article: New Court of Appeal Judgment provides clarity on QOCS – Darren Lewis of St John’s Chambers – 31 07 17. pdf

 

QOCS and Credit Hire: a Pyrrhic victory avoided and…Autofocus: the End of the Road.

Barrister: Patrick West

Area of law: Personal Injury 

Date: 21 July 2017

Summary: Patrick addresses credit hire charges referencing the case of Select Car Rentals (North West) Ltd v Esure Services Ltd (2017) [2017] EWHC 1434 (QB).

Download article: Latest article from Patrick West | QOCS and Credit Hire: a Pyrrhic victory avoided and…Autofocus: the End of the Road

Relief from sanction after Denton : A summary of cases

Barrister: Matthew White & Marcus Coates-Walker
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Summary: Matthew White, a member of our Personal Injury team,  first created the table which has now been updated by barrister Marcus Coates-Walker summarising cases which have dealt with relief from sanction issues since Denton. The document provides readers with cases from Denton up to the end of April 2017. It sets out each part of the Denton test together with the outcome.

View/download summary of cases: Relief from sanction after Denton: A summary of cases

Relief from sanction after Denton : A summary of cases

Barrister: Marcus Coates-Walker & Matthew White
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Summary: Marcus Coates-Walker, a member of our Personal Injury team, has updated the table first created by barrister Matthew White summarising cases which have dealt with relief from sanction issues since Denton. The document provides readers with cases from Denton up to the end of April 2017. It sets out each part of the Denton test together with the outcome.

View/download summary of cases: Relief from sanction after Denton: A summary of cases

In a fix: PAD application costs in Sharp v Leeds CC

Barrister: Marcus Coates-Walker
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Source: Personal Injury Law Journal March 2017 
Summary: Marcus Coates-Walker, a member of our Personal Injury team, has recently authored an article within the March edition of the Personal Injury Law Journal 2017 on Sharp v Leeds CC where it was decided that fixed costs do apply to the costs of a PAD application in ex-protocol cases. 

Download article: In a fix: PAD application costs in Sharp v Leeds CC

Latest Court of Appeal Credit Hire Judgment: McBride v UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 144

Barrister: James Marwick
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Date: 16 March 2017
Summary: James Marwick, a member of our Personal Injury team, provides analysis of the latest credit hire case before the Court of Appeal.

Download article: Latest Court of Appeal Credit Hire Judgment: McBride v UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 144

The new – 0.75% discount rate – some worked examples

Barrister: Rachel Segal
Area of Law: Personal Injury
Date: 27th February 2017
Summary: The discount rate has moved by a huge 3.25% downwards to -0.75%. It has not moved down by 0.75% (to 1.75%, which many would probably not have been surprised by), rather it has dropped to -0.75%. The practical effect of that is that rather than awards of damage being discounted for accelerated receipt, they will now be uplifted for accelerated receipt. Following important update, Rachel provides further worked examples of what the new -0.75% discount rate might mean in practice for a variety of common scenarios.

Download full article: -0.75% further examples


Next