Search Results for

The Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal yesterday upheld a 15-month prison sentence for a personal injury fraudster involved in a staged accident.  The Defendant had been a member of a gang carrying out multiple staged RTAs claiming modest sums for alleged whiplash injuries.  The ringleader had already been sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment


Who should determine any questions as to costs at the conclusion of a trial? The standard – and it seems almost always correct – answer, would be the trial judge himself. The rationale is obvious and entirely sensible – that such ancillary issues should be determined by the tribunal which heard the case from which


  Stylianou v Toyoshima (1) Suncorp Insurance (2) (2013) EWHC 2188 (QB) is the latest in a line of cases addressing the thorny issue of the English court’s jurisdiction over accidents abroad. The facts read like a conflict of laws exam question: an English Claimant was injured by a Japanese defendant whilst on Holiday in


Personal Injury, one party on a CFA, a staged accident, the Luton County Court – not obvious material for a play in the West End. Nick Payne has been given a Four Star review by the Guardian’s Michael Billington for his play ‘The Same Deep Water As Me’ which is running at the Donmar Warehouse


The notes in the White Book below Civil Procedure Rule 3.14 suggests the “rule is explicit and the consequences of failure to comply Draconian”. The rule itself provides that “Unless the court otherwise orders, any party which fails to file a budget despite being required to do so will be treated as having filed a


Does the original checklist under rule 3.9 (relief from sanctions) have any role now? That question was considered by Hildyard J in Thevarajah v Riordan (9th August 2013, unreported). The Claimant sought to strike out the Defendant’s Defence for failure to comply with an unless order in relation to disclosure. The Defendant sought relief from sanctions


In an interesting survey of the principles giving rise to duties of care and vicarious liability, Mrs Justice Swift has handed down a liability judgment in a catastrophic injury case brought against various categories of defendant.  The claimant was injured when her scarf got caught up in the rear axle of a 4-stroke engine go-kart. 


The long hot summer has encouraged not just questionable sartorial choices but an influx in the number of commuters hopping on bikes. Sadly, this has led to a high number of cyclist deaths. A few days ago a man died after being hit by a lorry near Archway. He is the sixth cyclist to be


  Mrs Monk was made redundant from her position as an administrative assistant at the First Respondent’s primary school, with effect from 31st August 2008. On 10th July, however, she was required to clear her desk before being publicly escorted from the premises. She brought a claim for psychiatric injuries. Her claim was struck out


In a solicitors’ negligence claim based on a previous case which was lost or under-settled it is not unusual to see the complaint that one party is seeking to re-litigate the original claim.  However, the complaint is normally one levelled by the defendant against the claimant.  The correct approach is to assess the “value” of


Subscribe for our newsletters, updates and seminars


Subscribe