“A father and son have today (Friday 28 June) been sentenced to a total of 11 years in prison at St. Albans Crown Court after being found guilty of the manslaughter – on the basis of gross negligence – of Stephen Kenyon, a driver employed at their haulage firm.”
Crown Prosecution Service, 28th June 2013
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
“The families of soldiers killed in Iraq can pursue damages against the government under the Human Rights Act, the Supreme Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 19th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Supreme Court judges will rule later on whether relatives of soldiers killed in Iraq can sue the government for damages under the Human Rights Act.”
BBC News, 19th June 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of ‘care and attention’ in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.”
NearlyLegal, 20th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“The conveyancing profession has always had to walk a difficult line in carrying out its day-to-day activities in property transactions. Not only are conveyancers required to be expert in all aspects of property related law, but they have a duty of care to everyone in the transaction (or so it seems). It can easily be the case that, despite a firm’s intentions to act in their client’s best interests, under outcomes-focused regulation, they can still be held liable for issues that arise. This responsibility, coupled with increasing regulation and compliance requirements, downward pressure on fees and on-going problems with access to lender panels, makes the conveyancing landscape more than a little challenging.”
New Law Journal, 18th April 2013
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
“More than 30 families have taken legal action against a hospital in north-west
England for a catalogue of baby and maternal deaths and injuries.”
BBC News, 15th March 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Police and prosecutors are studying a damning report into ‘appalling’ failures of care at an NHS hospital where hundreds of patients needlessly died, to examine whether any criminal charges need to be brought against those involved.”
The Guardian, 15th February 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The family of a young woman is suing the country’s biggest out-of-hours GP provider and one of its nurses, whose failures meant her fatal condition was not diagnosed, because neither will accept liability in a test case over legal responsibility in a privatised NHS.”
The Guardian, 17th December 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A nurse has been found guilty of the manslaughter of a four-week-old baby who bled to death after a botched home circumcision.”
The Independent, 14th December 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
The duty of care of Public Authorities: Too Much, Too Little or About Right? (PDF)
Speech by Master of the Rolls
PIBA Richard Davies Lecture, 27th November 2012
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
Regina (L) v West London Mental Health NHS Trust [2012] EWHC 3200 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 357
“The common law duty to act fairly was engaged when a decision was made as to whether to transfer a patient detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 from a medium to a high security hospital.”
WLR Daily, 13th November 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Relatives of soldiers killed in Iraq have secured a victory in the latest round of a compensation fight with ministers.”
The Guardian, 19th October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The families of four UK soldiers killed in Iraq are to find out later whether they can sue the Ministry of Defence.”
BBC News, 19th October 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“What constitutes a defect or a lack of repair for the landlord to be liable for tenant’s injury?”
NearlyLegal, 7th August 2012
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
Selwood v Durham County Council and others [2012] EWCA Civ 979; [2012] WLR (D) 231
“When determining whether a defendant owed a common law duty of care to a claimant in respect of the actions of a third party on the basis of foreseeability, proximity and fairness, justice and reasonableness, in accordance with the test laid down in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605, there was no need to show that the defendant had assumed any responsibility for the claimant’s safety. In determining whether it was fair, just and reasonable to impose that duty of care on a defendant who was a public authority, additional factors of public policy had to be considered and some classes of claimant would stand in such a special relationship with the defendant public authority that it would be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care in respect of the actions of a third party. In respect of that limited class of claimants, the weight to be attached to some of the policy considerations which rendered a duty to a wider class undesirable was much less than if the duty was one owed to the world at large. In order to establish the existence of a duty of care on the basis of an assumption of responsibility, there was no requirement for something positive to that effect to have been said or something done which clearly indicated such assumption, and the assumption of responsibility could be inferred from circumstances.”
WLR Daily, 18th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Domestic and Personal Injury Newsletter (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, June 2012
Source: www.39essex.com
“The government is under a legal obligation to ensure British soldiers are sent to fight with adequate equipment and training, the court of appeal heard on Monday in a case that has potentially profound implications for the treatment of troops on the battlefield.”
The Guardian, 25th June 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The stepfather of Baby P, Steven Barker, has launched a £40,000 compensation bid after he was injured in a violent prison attack, it has been reported.”
Daily Telegraph, 25th June 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Gordon Exall looks at the lessons that practitioners undertaking fatal accident cases can learn from the recent professional negligence case of Amin –v- Imran Khan.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 3rd April 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
Haringey London Borough Council v Mountplace Ltd: [2012] EWHC 698 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 100
“The duty of care imposed on a producer of waste (or anyone else who fell within one of the different categories of waste holder) by section 34(1)(c) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 was a duty to secure the results set out in the subsection which fell to complied with on the occasion of a given transfer of waste, and the question as to what were the reasonable measures applicable to him ‘in that capacity’ to secure those results fell to be answered by reference to his capacity on that occasion in the circumstances prevailing at that time. However, that did not mean that a waste holder could not comply with that duty on the occasion of the transfer by having reference to measures he had already taken on days prior to that occasion in anticipation of that occasion, nor did it preclude the court from considering such measures, or the absence thereof, in determining whether the duty had been complied with.”
WLR Daily, 28th March 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024