Search Results for

CASE REPORT: –       Scott v Symons (2012) CA (Civ Div) 19/06/2012     At first instance, a motorcyclist was held responsible for a road traffic accident by riding his motorcycle onto the wrong side of the road. The motorcyclist himself had been injured by a car and gave the sole oral testimony at the trial.


The discount for loss of a chance is not confined to future losses.  It also applies to the hypothetical past. Many injured claimants had plans to start work or resume work only for such plans to be delayed or obliterated by an injury. Defendants shouldn’t assume that claimants who were unemployed at the time of


Solicitors Regulation Authority v Dennison [2012] EWCA Civ 421 Mr Dennison was a solicitor in a firm specialising in personal injury claims. He also had an interest in a company providing medical reports for use in litigation. He used his position in the firm to instruct the company to prepare medical reports for his clients.


  Motorists have never been able to rely solely upon a stated speed limit as justification to drive at a certain speed. This has recently been restated, having only lately been at the heart of another judgment of the High Court in Rehman v The Estate of George Brady & Anor [2012] EWHC78 (QB).  


Mr O’Brien and his nephew Mr Joyce must be amongst the most incompetent thieves around. They stole a ladder from the front garden of a house and put it into the back of the van but could not close the door. Mr O’Brien drove the van off to make a speedy getaway whilst Mr Joyce


The recent Court of Appeal decision in Ghaith v Indesit (2012) EWCA 642 underscores quite how onerous the statutory obligations imposed upon employers by the six-pack of EC Regulations can be. The rather unedifying context was stock-taking of spare parts for white goods (washing machines drums etc) for the Defendant company. The claimant, a service engineer,


Motor insurers are keen to keep up the pressure up on the courts to exonerate drivers or at least to ramp up the findings of contributory negligence in cases where pedestrian claimants wrongly walk into the road in front of approaching vehicles.  However, three recent decisions show the pace of change, if any, to be


How do you get off Scott-free when you have made an admission of liability and paid millions in damages? The answer in AC and Others v Devon County Council [2012] EWHA 796 was not by withdrawing that admission but bringing a Part 20 Claim. Even then the result is rather curious but the case raises some


Picture the scene: a wild area of woodland, full of trees, leaves, plants and wildlife. How nice it would be to have an area like that within the grounds of your workplace. An area like that is going to be full of trip and slip hazards. Surely no-one would want it to be smoothed out,


In the latest of my run of articles on recent developments in the law of contributory negligence in personal injury cases, I have turned to the recent decision of the High Court in Emma Hughes (by Anne Marie Armstrong) v Estate of Dayne Joshua Williams, deceased (Defendant) and Louise Williams (Third Party) [2012] EWHC 1078


Subscribe for our newsletters, updates and seminars


Subscribe