‘Even those who are experienced in personal injury cases in general can sometimes find industrial diseases cases difficult to get to grips with. Noise induced hearing loss cases can fall into this category. Such cases sometimes appear littered with seemingly impenetrable, highly technical arguments.’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 19th May 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The area of fatal accident claims is a wide one and, on occasion, a very complicated one. This handout and indeed the lecture which it accompanies is not intended to cover every aspect of such claims. To do so would take too much time and would, in any event, fail to cover every eventuality.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 19th May 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘The diagnosis and quantification of NIHL is affected by innumerable confounding factors, which include:
(i) Constitutional issues, such as unrelated third pathologies, which can
‘replicate’ the pattern of threshold elevation as appears in NIHL cases;
(ii) Personal susceptibility to hearing damage: ‘soft and hard ears’;
(iii) The actual threshold at birth or before noise exposure, which means assumptions must be made regarding the extent of any allegedly raised threshold;
(iv) Age. Particularly how the effects of age are to be calculated and the assumptions which are valid in arriving at an approved or reliable AAHL table of estimates’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 22nd May 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has found that a council was liable for an injury suffered by a claimant when she tripped on a tree root on a path constructed in a park by one of its predecessor authorities.’
Local Government Lawyer, 2nd June 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘There is currently an enormous international effort in progress to invent, test and obtain regulatory approval for a COVID-19 vaccine (or more accurately, a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, the underlying virus). It is right to consider now, how such a vaccine will get regulatory approval, how such approval might be affected by BREXIT, and if no-fault vaccine damage schemes may apply to any such novel vaccine.’
Henderson Chambers, 18th May 2020
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘The name of this case may seem familiar; perhaps too familiar given the time it usually takes for matters to proceed through our court system. However, you’d be right. This is the third preliminary issue in the matter of Harry Roberts (a minor and a protected party by his mother and litigation friend Mrs Lauren Roberts) v Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (1), Ministry of Defence (2) and Allegemeines Krankenhaus Viersen GMBH (3) [2020] EWHC 994 (QB) to be determined by the High Court and the second in less than twelve months.’
No. 5 Chambers, 18th May 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘Personal injury and clinical negligence practices, as with much of life, are undergoing sudden and profound changes during this Covid-19 pandemic and the current ‘lockdown’. There are obvious effects, such as the adjournment of trials ‘en masse’ and the embracing of digital platforms. Implementation of the governments’ whiplash reforms has been put back until April 2021 and the much-awaited appeal in Swift v Carpenter was delayed once again. But the economic consequences of the pandemic will also influence PI and CN litigation, in some subtle but important ways.’
No. 5 Chambers, 26th May 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘Employers and workers are facing unprecedented challenges in responding to the current pandemic and the measures put in place by the UK governments to tackle it. One area of increasing concern is the impact of the crisis on mental health and wellbeing.’
Old Square Chambers, 26th May 2020
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has called on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee to review the issue of whether disbursements should be payable separately in fixed-cost personal injury cases.’
Litigation Futures, 21st May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has cut a costs award to a seriously injured claimant because exaggeration was “built into the structure” of the way the claim was presented before and during the trial.’
Litigation Futures, 13th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In a case in which fundamental dishonesty or fraud has not been found but, there has been a significant level of exaggeration, will the court reduce an award of costs? The answer, of course, is considering CPR Part 44: yes… possibly.’
Park Square Barristers, 5th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘An inquest can sometimes present the only opportunity for a family to ask questions about the circumstances leading to the death of a relative. It can also form an important part of the investigation into a potential claim for personal injury causing death. In relation to deaths arising from Covid – 19 those claims are likely to come from families of employees who have died following exposure to Covid – 19 in the workplace. This article reviews the Chief Coroner’s Guidance Number 37 (CCG 37) dated 28 April 2020 and the Notification of Death Regulations 2019 in considering when a coroner’s investigation should be opened in respect of a Covid – 19 death where possible exposure was in the workplace.’
Park Square Barristers, 29th April 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘It’s a welcome development, recently announced in the Law Gazette, that ABI members and various claimant firms have already signed up to an ongoing protocol adding flexibility to the way claims are handled at this time. A similar agreement has been made between the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and Forum of Insurance Lawyers.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th April 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The original dispute pertained to a claim (issued by the Respondent in these proceedings) which started under, and then exited, the Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents Protocol. On the first visit to the Court of Appeal, the issue was whether the Appellant’s (the Defendant in the original dispute) cost liability in respect of the ex-portal claim was limited to fixed costs. The Court of Appeal held that the fixed costs regime for which Section IIIA of CPR Part 45 provides was applicable and the parties had not contracted out of fixed costs. Absent any application by the Respondent pursuant to CPR 45.29J for a higher amount by reason of “exceptional circumstances”, the Respondent was thus entitled to £16,705.15 in respect of her costs of the claim. Resultingly, both parties had cost liabilities: the Appellant in regards to the ex-portal claim, and the Respondent in respect of the appeal.’
Parklane Plowden, 17th April 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The whiplash reforms have been delayed until April 2021 due to the coronavirus crisis, the Lord Chancellor announced today.’
Legal Futures, 21st April 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The High Court has insisted that there must be a “level playing field” when it comes to recording medical examinations.’
Litigation Futures, 21st April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Exegesis and eisegesis. Exegesis is interpreting a text’s meaning in accordance with the author’s context and discoverable meaning. Eisegesis is when a reader imposes their own subjective interpretation on a text. Both have more than a passing similarity to the common law doctrine of precedent and the techniques of statutory interpretation.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 17th April 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘The protocol aimed at cutting out opportunistic tactics by either claimants or defendants in personal injury (PI) cases during the Covid-19 pandemic has been extended to at least 20 May.’
Litigation Futures, 20th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025