Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group"

Transcription

1 Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #26 11 August 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T F Page 1

2 Welcome to this week s edition of Insight. In this week s edition we look at cases relating to: What levels of damages are payable by MIB where a UK resident is injured abroad by an uninsured driver, What damages are payable by concurrent tortfeasors, When, following a default judgment, a defendant can serve a defence alleging fraud Should you have any feedback or comments please do not hesitate to contact me at malcolm.henke@h-f.co.uk. Malcolm Henke, Partner & Head of LACIG RTA - Damages The long awaited judgment in Moreno v MIB (2016) UKSC 52 has been delivered by the Supreme Court. The claimant is a UK resident. In May 2011, whilst on holiday in Greece, she was hit by a car. The car was registered in Greece and driven by an uninsured driver. It was not disputed that the driver was responsible for the accident. The claimant suffered very serious injuries. The claimant has pursued damages from the appellant UK Motor Insurers Bureau ( UKMIB ), pursuant to the Directives embodied in the Sixth Directive 2009/103/EC and which were transposed into English law by The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003 No 37). The purpose of the arrangements introduced by the Directives and the 2003 Regulations was to ensure that compensation is available for victims of motor accidents occurring anywhere in the European Union and to facilitate their recovery of such compensation. The primary subject of this appeal was whether the scope of the claimant s claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. Her concern was that Greek law would yield a lesser measure of compensation than English law. At first instance, a High Court judge considered that he was bound by previous Court of Appeal authority (Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau (2010)) to hold that the damages were to be determined by English law The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal. The 2003 Regulations should, so far as possible, be interpreted in a sense which was not in any way inconsistent with the Directives. There was no suggestion in the 2003 Regulations or elsewhere, that the domestic legislator intended to do anything other than faithfully implement and give Page 2

3 effect to the Directives. Two questions were central to this appeal. The first was whether the Directives prescribe any particular approach to the scope or measure of recovery applicable in a claim against a compensation body under article 7 of the Fourth Directive (article 25(1) of the Sixth Directive). The second was, if they do, whether the language of regulation 13(2)(b) of the 2003 Regulations reflects this approach, or mandates some different approach, whatever the Directives may have required. As to the first question, viewed as a whole, the Directives were and are a scheme of which the constant aim has been to improve the prospects and ease with which injured parties can recover the compensation to which they are entitled in respect of any loss or damage caused by vehicles. The inference is that the victim of a motor accident is entitled to the same compensation, whether against the driver responsible, his or her insurer, or, that failing, against the Motor Insurance Bureau of the State of the accident or indeed the compensation body established in the victim s state of residence. Clauses 7.2 and 8.2 of the Agreement provided that the compensation body in the victim s country of residence was to apply, in evaluating liability and assessing compensation, the law of the country in which the accident occurred. The Agreement needed to be viewed as part of the wider scheme, which in turn needed to be construed as a consistent whole. a victim s entitlement to compensation will be measured by reference to the law of the state of the accident.. The Directives do not leave it to individual member states to provide for compensation in accordance with any law that such states may choose. On the contrary, they proceed on the basis that a victim s entitlement to compensation will be measured on a consistent basis, by reference to the law of the state of the accident, whichever of the routes to recovery provided by the Directives he or she invokes. In consequence, it also makes no difference which route is chosen to the measure of liability of the body or person ultimately responsible. Since the position as a matter of European Union law is clear, there is no need for a reference to the Court of Justice. As to the second question, the 2003 Regulations were consistent with the scheme of the Directives. The loss and damage recoverable from the UKMIB is said in regulation 12(2)(b) to be that properly recoverable in consequence of that accident by the injured party from [the insured] person under the laws applying in that part of the United Kingdom in which the injured party resided at the date of the accident. The most obvious purpose of this is to determine which of the United Kingdom s three legal systems should apply, rather than prescribing the measure of recovery in such proceedings. The decisions in Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau and Bloy (2013) should be over-ruled in relation to the meaning of regulation 13(2)(b). Comment This means that, contrary to earlier case law, where the MIB is sued by a UK resident for injury caused by an uninsured driver in another jurisdiction, the damages to be awarded are at the level of the place where the damage occurred, and not UK levels. Page 3

4 Damages - Double recovery Although it is a clinical negligence case Wright v Barts Health NHS Trust (2016) EWHC 1834 (QB) is an unusual case looking at the potential apportionment of damages between the original tortfeasor and a hospital accused of subsequent clinical negligence. The claimant had been working as a sub-contractor for a roofing company in 2011 when he fell through a skylight and sustained a series of spinal fractures. At the end of his hospital treatment he had suffered a complete spinal cord injury and was a paraplegic. He initiated proceedings against the roofing company for the whole of his loss. The company began negotiations on the basis that the claimant had been contributorily negligent as he was the senior supervisor on site and was involved in the job's risk assessment. In the meantime, the claimant sent a letter of claim for damages to the defendant hospital trust, claiming that he had suffered negligent treatment that had caused the outcome of his accident to be much worse than it should have been. In September 2014, the claimant reached a compromise agreement in his claim against the roofing company. A substantial discount for contributory negligence and litigation risk (80%) was made in agreeing the settlement sum. In November 2014, he informed the defendant of the compromise agreement and sent it details of the same. He then issued proceedings against it. act in breach of different duties to the claimant. They were therefore concurrent tortfeasors, and the release of one concurrent tortfeasor did not have in law the effect of releasing another. The proper approach to a compromise case was to focus primarily on the construction of the agreement in its appropriate factual context. The test was whether the agreement represented the full measure of the claimant's estimated loss. In the claimant's case, he had not been fully compensated. Because of the contributory negligence discount, the roofing company was not liable for the whole of the additional loss. It had neither paid nor purported to pay the whole loss caused by the defendant (on the assumption that the claimant's claim against the latter would succeed). It was therefore impossible to construe the compromise agreement in its true factual context as providing full compensation for the loss being claimed against the defendant. A settlement with one concurrent tortfeasor did not release the others unless it was clear that it was intended to have that effect, or unless the payment clearly satisfied the whole claim. There was no risk of double recovery as the claimant had agreed that appropriate credit would have to be given for the sum he had received from the roofing company if his claim succeeded. The defendant applied to strike out the claim arguing that it was an abuse of process as the claimant had been compensated in full for his loss by the agreement with the roofing company and there should be no double recovery. Refusing the application, the High Court judge held that there was a pre-clinical negligence element of the damage caused to the claimant for which only the roofing company was liable. That element included the loss which occurred after the clinical negligence but which would have occurred anyway. After the clinical negligence, there was an additional loss which would not have occurred but for the clinical negligence. Both the defendant and the roofing company were liable for that additional loss as, by causing the injury, the roofing company had exposed the roofer to the hazard of imperfect medical treatment. However, the roofing company was liable only for the proportion of the additional loss that remained due after the reduction for the roofer's contributory negligence, whereas the defendant was liable for all of it. the release of one concurrent tortfeasor did not have in law the effect of releasing another Comment There was no suggestion here that the defendant s alleged clinical negligence broke the chain of causation between the initial accident and the final outcome. The case involved concurrent, rather than joint and several tortfeasors. Accordingly, if one action had been initiated against both tortfeasors and if judgment had been given against them both, those judgments would have been in different sums. This was because each made a contribution to that part of the loss by a different tortious act in breach of different duties to the claimant. The roofing company and the defendant had each made a contribution to the additional loss by a different tortious Page 4

5 Serving a defence following a default judgement There seems to be little doubt that the courts are becoming more sympathetic towards defendants where evidence emerges that a claimant may have exaggerated his or her claim. In Hayden v Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust (2016) EWHC 1962 (QB) the claimant had suffered a back injury when attempting to transfer a patient from a trolley. She had claimed damages for personal injury and liability was admitted. Judgment in default had been entered. The trial date was vacated and the defendant was given permission to rely on covertly-recorded video surveillance evidence. The defendant applied for permission to serve a defence which pleaded that the claimant had exaggerated the consequences of her accident. The claimant applied for permission to rely on the evidence of a video evidence analysis consultant who had stated that there were irregularities with the recordings. The claimant submitted that the defendant was seeking to abuse the process of the court by slipping in a defence on causation by pleading fraud. to allow a defendant to serve a defence alleging fraudulent exaggeration after default judgment had been entered was a bespoke solution to a particular problem Allowing the defendant s application but refusing that of the claimant, the High Court judge held that there was no difference between the defendant's case as set out in its defence and that which it had proposed to advance at the trial which had been vacated. The defendant was entitled to run its case on the issue exactly as it wanted. The decision to allow a defendant to apply for permission to serve a defence alleging fraudulent exaggeration after default judgment had been entered was a bespoke solution to a particular problem. The judgment meant that the claimant was injured in an accident at work which was entirely the fault of the defendant and that she had suffered some damage as a result of that injury. She was therefore entitled to recover all the loss which she could show had been caused by the accident. What loss and damage was caused by the defendant's negligence was part of the exercise of assessing damages. Expert evidence was only necessary to the extent that it assisted the court. The video evidence analysis consultant principally sought to give evidence of what he had seen when viewing the video footage and reading the surveillance logs. All he said in addition to his factual analysis was that the operatives chose what to film and when to film. No knowledge or skill was involved in that exercise. It was factual evidence and the claimant already had permission to adduce factual evidence. Comment The judge summed up the effect of a default judgment in a personal injury case by quoting from an earlier Court of Appeal decision: Turner v. PE Toleman (1999). "No doubt defendants must acknowledge some injury to a plaintiff before judgment could properly be entered against them.that is a far cry from saying that they are necessarily liable for each and every aspect of loss and injury which the plaintiff in his pleaded claim asserts he suffered." When referring to the factual evidence of the claimant s purported video surveillance expert the judge said the factual analysis which (the expert) has done in drafting his Appendices is useful and those documents should be before the Judge. They could have been prepared by solicitors or counsel. This sounds like a costs point for the defendant to take, depending on the final outcome of the case. Page 5

6 Disclaimer & Copyright Notice The contents of this document are considered accurate at the time of delivery. The information provided does not constitute specific legal advice. You should always consult a suitably qualified solicitor about any individual legal matter. Horwich Farrelly Solicitors accepts no liability for errors or omissions in this document. All rights reserved. This material provided is for personal use only. No part may be distributed to any other party without the prior written permission of Horwich Farrelly Solicitors or the copyright holder. No part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical photocopying, microfilming, recording, scanning or otherwise for commercial purposes without the written permission of Horwich Farrelly or the copyright holder. Horwich Farrelly 2016 Page 6

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #78 19 April 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to

More information

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #27 01 September 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome

More information

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #19 17 June 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to this

More information

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group

Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #83 08 June 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to Insight

More information

Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors

Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors Author: Tim Wardell Special Counsel Edwards Michael Lawyers Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working

More information

Working at Height Seminar. The Kube, Leicester Racecourse 4 October 2018

Working at Height Seminar. The Kube, Leicester Racecourse 4 October 2018 Working at Height Seminar The Kube, Leicester Racecourse 4 October 2018 Introduction Keoghs National defendant-focused, top 100 law firm, acting for leading insurers, businesses and suppliers to the insurance

More information

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT (SA GG 5689) came into force in South Africa and South West Africa on date of publication: 1 June 1956 (see section 6 of Act) APPLICABILITY TO SOUTH WEST AFRICA: Section 6 originally stated This Act shall

More information

CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS

CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS Cap.107] CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS CHAPTER 107 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT WRONGDOERS Act No. 12 of 1968. AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW RELATING TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND JOINT

More information

Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92

Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92 New South Wales Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Civil Liability Act 2002 No 22 2 4 Consequential repeals

More information

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ACT

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ACT c t CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to December 2, 2015. It is intended for information

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 31, 2002 LANA MARLER, ET AL. v. BOBBY E. SCOGGINS Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rhea County No. 18471 Buddy D. Perry, Judge

More information

Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED. Updated to 13 April 2017

Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED. Updated to 13 April 2017 Number 41 of 1961 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 REVISED Updated to 13 April 2017 This Revised Act is an administrative consolidation of the. It is prepared by the Law Reform Commission in accordance with its

More information

STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT

STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT STATE PROCEEDINGS ACT Act 5 of 1953 15 October 1954 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1A. Short title 1B. Interpretation PRELIMINARY PART I SUBSTANTIVE LAW 1. Liability of State in contract 2. Liability of State

More information

The ABTA Arbitration Scheme Rules

The ABTA Arbitration Scheme Rules 23 rd May 2016 The ABTA Arbitration Scheme Rules 1. Introduction 1.1 This Scheme is supplied exclusively by CEDR, Europe s leading independent dispute resolution service. 1.2 The Scheme has been designed

More information

Proportionate Liability in Queensland: An Overview

Proportionate Liability in Queensland: An Overview Bond Law Review Volume 17 Issue 2 Article 4 2005 Proportionate Liability in Queensland: An Overview Paul Holmes Follow this and additional works at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr This Article is

More information

Technical claims brief. Monthly update May 2011

Technical claims brief. Monthly update May 2011 Technical claims brief Monthly update May 2011 Contents Technical claims brief Monthly update May 2011 News 1 Association of Personal Injury Lawyers initiates judicial review of discount rate 1 Ministry

More information

What s news in construction law 16 June 2006

What s news in construction law 16 June 2006 2 What s news in construction law 16 June 2006 Warranties & indemnities the lessons from Ellington & Tempo services For as long as contracts have existed, issues have arisen in relation to provisions involving

More information

TECHNICAL RELEASE TR 02/2016 COMPANIES ACT Examiners statutory changes

TECHNICAL RELEASE TR 02/2016 COMPANIES ACT Examiners statutory changes TECHNICAL RELEASE TR 02/2016 COMPANIES ACT 2014 Examiners statutory changes Readers of this document should note that the Companies Act 2014 is a significant and new piece of legislation whose interpretation

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2014-00133 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND ANAND SINGH Defendant AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD

More information

Damages in Tort 6. Damages in Contract 18. Restitution 27. Rescission 32. Specific Performance 38. Account of Profits 40.

Damages in Tort 6. Damages in Contract 18. Restitution 27. Rescission 32. Specific Performance 38. Account of Profits 40. LW401 REMEDIES Damages in Tort 6 Damages in Contract 18 Restitution 27 Rescission 32 Specific Performance 38 Account of Profits 40 Injunctions 43 Mareva Orders and Anton Piller Orders 49 Rectification

More information

Liability for Injuries Caused by Dogs. Jonathan Owen

Liability for Injuries Caused by Dogs. Jonathan Owen Liability for Injuries Caused by Dogs Jonathan Owen Introduction 1. This article addressed the liability for injuries caused by dogs, such as when a person is bitten, or knocked over by a dog. Such cases,

More information

MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge

MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge IN THE COUNTY COURT AT BRIGHTON CLAIM NO: D60YJ743 Brighton County and Family Court William Street Brighton BN2 0RF BEFORE HER HONOUR JUDGE VENN BETWEEN MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING Claimant and MR MARK MCDONNELL

More information

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 WORKPLACE SAFETY AND INSURANCE APPEALS TRIBUNAL DECISION NO. 1086/15 BEFORE: R. McCutcheon: Vice-Chair HEARING: May 28, 2015 at Toronto Oral hearing Post-hearing activity completed on September 10, 2015

More information

CIVIL LIABILITY BILL [HL] EXPLANATORY NOTES

CIVIL LIABILITY BILL [HL] EXPLANATORY NOTES CIVIL LIABILITY BILL [HL] EXPLANATORY NOTES What these notes do These Explanatory Notes relate to the Civil Liability Bill [HL] as introduced in the House of Lords on 20 March. These Explanatory Notes

More information

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Nicholas C. Grant Ebeltoft. Sickler. Kolling. Grosz. Bouray. PLLC PO Box 1598 Dickinson, ND 58602 Tel: (701) 225-5297 Email: ngrant@eskgb.com www.eskgb.com

More information

Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted

Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted www.pavlacklawfirm.com September 30 2016 by: Colin E. Flora Associate Civil Litigation Attorney Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted This

More information

Technical claims brief. Monthly update August 2010

Technical claims brief. Monthly update August 2010 Technical claims brief Monthly update August 2010 Contents Monthly update August 2010 News 1 Court of Appeal to rule on scope of pure economic loss 1 Limiting recoverable defence costs in criminal cases

More information

Civil Law is known as Private Law. Regulates disputes between individuals; between parties; and between individuals and parties.

Civil Law is known as Private Law. Regulates disputes between individuals; between parties; and between individuals and parties. Civil Disputes Civil Law is known as Private Law. Regulates disputes between individuals; between parties; and between individuals and parties. The main purpose of Civil Law is to compensate victims. Civil

More information

Age Discrimination and Public Authorities. Andrew Hogan

Age Discrimination and Public Authorities. Andrew Hogan Age Discrimination and Public Authorities Andrew Hogan Introduction 1. On 1 st October 2012 the provisions in the Equality Act 2010, which prohibit age discrimination in the provision of goods and services

More information

CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II

CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II State Liability and Proceedings 3 CHAPTER 6:05 STATE LIABILITY AND PROCEEDINGS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PRELIMINARY PART II SUBSTANTIVE LAW 3. Liability

More information

I Fought the Law ANDREW HOGAN

I Fought the Law ANDREW HOGAN I Fought the Law ANDREW HOGAN 1 It has been cynically observed in the author s presence, that insurance companies only care about fraud and costs, and only about care about the latter because they regard

More information

ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS SCOTLAND Standard of competence for Senior Litigators

ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS SCOTLAND Standard of competence for Senior Litigators ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS SCOTLAND Standard of competence for Senior Litigators INTRODUCTION Standards of occupational competence Standards of occupational competence are widely used in many

More information

NEGLIGENCE. All four of the following must be demonstrated for a legal claim of negligence to be successful:

NEGLIGENCE. All four of the following must be demonstrated for a legal claim of negligence to be successful: NEGLIGENCE WHAT IS NEGLIGENCE? Negligence is unintentional harm to others as a result of an unsatisfactory degree of care. It occurs when a person NEGLECTS to do something that a reasonably prudent person

More information

Helen Wolstenholme. Get in touch. Practice Overview. Personal Injury. "A thorough and competent barrister with a good eye for detail.

Helen Wolstenholme. Get in touch. Practice Overview. Personal Injury. A thorough and competent barrister with a good eye for detail. Call 2002 Get in touch hwolstenholme@2tg.co.uk +44 (0)20 7822 1200 Practice Overview Identified as a Leader in the Field of Personal Injury in Chambers & Partners, Helen has a well-established practice

More information

TOPIC 2: LEGAL REMEDIES (DAMAGES - IN TORT AND CONTRACT)

TOPIC 2: LEGAL REMEDIES (DAMAGES - IN TORT AND CONTRACT) TOPIC 2: LEGAL REMEDIES (DAMAGES - IN TORT AND CONTRACT) Damages in tort to award expectation loss Damages in contract to award for the compensation of expected benefits/disappointed expectations in both

More information

MIB Untraced Drivers Agreement

MIB Untraced Drivers Agreement MIB Untraced Drivers Agreement THIS AGREEMENT is made on the 28 th February 2017 between the SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT ( the Secretary of State ) and the MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU ( MIB ), whose registered

More information

ANSWER A TO QUESTION 3

ANSWER A TO QUESTION 3 Question 3 Roofer contracted with Hal to replace the roof on Hal s house. The usual practice among roofers was to place tarpaulins on the ground around the house to catch the nails and other materials

More information

Your jargon buster for your litigation case.

Your jargon buster for your litigation case. Your jargon buster for your litigation case. Your guide to litigation. dbslaw.co.uk 0800 157 7055 Birmingham - Nottingham Contents Page Introduction Court Process Preliminaries Pre-Issue and Trying to

More information

The Contributory Negligence Act

The Contributory Negligence Act 1 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE c. C-31 The Contributory Negligence Act being Chapter C-31 of The Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978 (effective February 26, 1979) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan,

More information

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT LAWS OF KENYA LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT CHAPTER 22 Revised Edition 2012 [2010] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2012]

More information

Question 1. On what theory or theories might damages be recovered, and what defenses might reasonably be raised in actions by:

Question 1. On what theory or theories might damages be recovered, and what defenses might reasonably be raised in actions by: Question 1 A state statute requires motorcyclists to wear a safety helmet while riding, and is enforced by means of citations and fines. Having mislaid his helmet, Adam jumped on his motorcycle without

More information

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS Frequently Asked Questions 1. Can I make a claim? If you have been injured because of the fault of someone else, you can claim financial compensation through the courts. 2. Who can

More information

FOR USE AFTER 1 NOVEMBER

FOR USE AFTER 1 NOVEMBER APIL / PIBA 6 STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS POSTED ON THE APIL AND PIBA WEBSITES AND TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL FOR USE AFTER 1 NOVEMBER 2005 INDEX

More information

Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding of

Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding of 4 Maryland Bar Journal September 2014 The Evolution of Pro Rata Contribution and Apportionment Among Joint Tort-Feasors By M. Natalie McSherry Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding

More information

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS Frequently Asked Questions 1. Can I make a claim? If you have been injured because of the fault of someone else, you can claim financial compensation through the courts. The dependants

More information

Defence and Counterclaim Training. By Andrew Mckie Barrister Clerksroom.

Defence and Counterclaim Training. By Andrew Mckie Barrister Clerksroom. Defence and Counterclaim Training. By Andrew Mckie Barrister Clerksroom Email andrewmckie@btinternet.com/ mckie@clerksroom.com Telephone Mobile: 07739 964012 Office: 0845 083 3000 Website www.clerksroom.com

More information

MOTOR FRAUD BRIEFING

MOTOR FRAUD BRIEFING Simon Trigger Francesca O Neill January 2019 Author Author MOTOR FRAUD BRIEFING In this edition of our Motor Fraud Briefing, Francesca O Neill and Simon Trigger discuss and comment on recent important

More information

THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER

THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER THE LAW PROFESSOR TORT LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #3 MODEL ANSWER Carol stopped her car at the entrance to her office building to get some papers from her office. She left her car unlocked and left

More information

Website Disclaimer. by SEQ Legal

Website Disclaimer. by SEQ Legal Website Disclaimer by SEQ Legal Website disclaimer 1 (1) Introduction This disclaimer governs your use of our website; by using our website, you accept this disclaimer in full. 2 If you disagree with any

More information

2014 No (L. 36) SENIOR COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES COUNTY COURT, ENGLAND AND WALES. The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.

2014 No (L. 36) SENIOR COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES COUNTY COURT, ENGLAND AND WALES. The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2014 No. 3299 (L. 36) SENIOR COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES COUNTY COURT, ENGLAND AND WALES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 8) Rules 2014 Made - - - - 16th December

More information

Civil Liability Act 2002

Civil Liability Act 2002 Western Australia Civil Liability Act 2002 As at 01 Jan 2013 Version 03-j0-02 Western Australia Civil Liability Act 2002 CONTENTS Part 1 Preliminary 1. Short title 2 2. Commencement 2 3. Terms used 2

More information

IIRSM Qatar Meeting 26 June 2018 Emma Higham

IIRSM Qatar Meeting 26 June 2018 Emma Higham IIRSM Qatar Meeting 26 June 2018 Emma Higham Qatar legal requirements for young workers 1. Potential Liability for workplace injuries / fatalities Criminal Civil Administrative sanctions Labour Law 2.

More information

KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II

KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II I. Kentucky s Dram Shop Act KY DRAM SHOP MEMO II KRS 413.241 Legislative finding; limitation on liability of licensed sellers or servers of intoxicating beverages; liability of intoxicated person (1) The

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/28/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/28/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/28/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/28/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/28/2016 05:04 PM INDEX NO. 190293/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/28/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X VINCENT ASCIONE, v. ALCOA,

More information

STANDARD CFA TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERSONAL INJURY CASES TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL

STANDARD CFA TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERSONAL INJURY CASES TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL STANDARD CFA TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERSONAL INJURY CASES TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL FOR USE AFTER 31 JANUARY 2013 PLEASE NOTE: THESE TERMS WILL

More information

Question 1. Under what theory or theories might Paul recover, and what is his likelihood of success, against: a. Charlie? b. KiddieRides-R-Us?

Question 1. Under what theory or theories might Paul recover, and what is his likelihood of success, against: a. Charlie? b. KiddieRides-R-Us? Question 1 Twelve-year-old Charlie was riding on his small, motorized 3-wheeled all terrain vehicle ( ATV ) in his family s large front yard. Suddenly, finding the steering wheel stuck in place, Charlie

More information

NDORS Trainer Licence Agreement

NDORS Trainer Licence Agreement NDORS Trainer Licence Agreement Table of Contents 1 Interpretation... 3 2 Licence Process... 8 3 Licence... 10 4 Services and Trainer's Responsibilities... 13 5 Updates... 16 6 Intellectual Property Rights...

More information

Twins Cities Claims Association: Updates on Rule 68, Good Faith Law, and Joint & Several Liability. Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.

Twins Cities Claims Association: Updates on Rule 68, Good Faith Law, and Joint & Several Liability. Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A. Twins Cities Claims Association: Updates on Rule 68, Good Faith Law, and Joint & Several Liability Presented by: Dyan Ebert & Cally Kjellberg Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A. April 13, 2010 The New Rule 68 The

More information

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Implications for Personal Injury Litigation

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Implications for Personal Injury Litigation www.mcdermottqc.com Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill covers a wide

More information

Restatement (Second) of Torts 496A (1965) Assumption of Risk

Restatement (Second) of Torts 496A (1965) Assumption of Risk Restatement (Second) of Torts 496A (1965) Assumption of Risk A plaintiff who voluntarily assumes a risk of harm arising from the negligent or reckless conduct of the defendant cannot recover for such harm.

More information

INDIVISIBLE INJURIES

INDIVISIBLE INJURIES INDIVISIBLE INJURIES Amelia J. Staunton February 2011 1 CONTACT LAWYER Amelia Staunton 604.891.0359 astaunton@dolden.com 1 Introduction What happens when a Plaintiff, recovering from injuries sustained

More information

Philip Mead AREAS OF EXPERTISE. International & Travel. Call: 1989

Philip Mead AREAS OF EXPERTISE. International & Travel. Call: 1989 Philip Mead Call: 1989 mead@12kbw.co.uk AREAS OF EXPERTISE International & Travel, Personal Injury, Employment & Discrimination, Insurance, Aviation Philip joins the International and Travel Group of 12KBW

More information

The Rental Exchange. Contribution Agreement for Rental Exchange Database. A world of insight

The Rental Exchange. Contribution Agreement for Rental Exchange Database. A world of insight The Rental Exchange Contribution Agreement for Rental Exchange Database A world of insight Contribution Agreement for Rental Exchange Database. Contribution Agreement for Rental Exchange Database. This

More information

UNIT 15 - Civil Litigation. Suggested Answers June 2010

UNIT 15 - Civil Litigation. Suggested Answers June 2010 UNIT 15 - Civil Litigation Suggested Answers June 2010 Note to Candidates and Tutors: The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students

More information

Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 Chapter 32

Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 Chapter 32 Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 Chapter 32 Preliminary 1 Definition of wrongful interference with goods In this Act wrongful interference, or wrongful interference with goods, means (d) conversion

More information

NOTE ON THE EXECUTION OF A DOCUMENT USING AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE

NOTE ON THE EXECUTION OF A DOCUMENT USING AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE NOTE ON THE EXECUTION OF A DOCUMENT USING AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE 1. Introduction This note has been prepared by a joint working party of The Law Society Company Law Committee and The City of London Law

More information

OCTOBER 2012 LAW REVIEW OBVIOUS TREE HAZARD ON PARK SLEDDING HILL

OCTOBER 2012 LAW REVIEW OBVIOUS TREE HAZARD ON PARK SLEDDING HILL OBVIOUS TREE HAZARD ON PARK SLEDDING HILL James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2012 James C. Kozlowski Under traditional principles of landowner liability for negligence, the landowner generally owes a legal

More information

36 month Software User Licence Agreement

36 month Software User Licence Agreement 36 month Software User Licence Agreement Boris Software Ltd, This licence agreement (Licence) is a legal agreement between you (Licensee or you) and Boris Software Limited whose registered office is situated

More information

J & D Towing, LLC v. Am. Alternative Ins. Corp.

J & D Towing, LLC v. Am. Alternative Ins. Corp. J & D Towing, LLC v. Am. Alternative Ins. Corp. Elliott Cooper Lauren Tow S 2016 This paper and/or presentation provides information on general legal issues. It is not intended to provide advice on any

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between KERRON MOE. And GARY HARPER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between KERRON MOE. And GARY HARPER THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No CV 2012-03569 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between KERRON MOE And Claimant GARY HARPER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER A. RAJKUMAR APPEARANCES Mr. St.

More information

Written evidence submitted by DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited (PCB 17) The Prisons and Courts Bill Part 5: Whiplash

Written evidence submitted by DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited (PCB 17) The Prisons and Courts Bill Part 5: Whiplash Written evidence submitted by DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited (PCB 17) The Prisons and Courts Bill Part 5: Whiplash About DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd provides general insurance

More information

FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998

FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998 FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998 IN exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Section 25 of the High Court Act, I hereby make the following Rules: Citation 1.

More information

Before : MR JUSTICE WARBY Between :

Before : MR JUSTICE WARBY Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 2829 (QB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION Case No: HQ13X02018 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 07/10/2015 Before : MR JUSTICE

More information

A response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers December 2017

A response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers December 2017 Civil Justice Council ADR and Civil Justice A response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers December 2017 Page 1 of 10 The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) is a not-for-profit organisation

More information

Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Response Policy. Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group

Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Response Policy. Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Response Policy 2018 Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group The Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy for Telford and Wrekin Clinical Commissioning Group

More information

Rachel Young. Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) , The Ropewalk, Nottingham NG1 5EF

Rachel Young. Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) , The Ropewalk, Nottingham NG1 5EF Rachel Young Contents Clinical Negligence... Personal Injury... Inquests... Disease... Costs & Litigation Funding... Counter Fraud... Credit Hire... 1 2 3 3 ii Rachel Young Rachel Young Call: 2006 Email:

More information

GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS

GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS PART 44 PART 44 Contents of this Part Rule 44.1 Rule 44.2 Rule 44.3 Rule 44.3A Rule 44.3B Rule 44.3C Rule 44.4 Rule 44.5 Rule 44.6 Rule 44.7 Rule 44.8 Rule 44.9 Rule 44.10 Rule

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/15/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/15/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2016 11:24 AM INDEX NO. 190043/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X JOHN D. FIEDERLEIN AND

More information

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03 JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place

More information

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT ANALYSIS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT ANALYSIS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT ANALYSIS BILL #: HB 491 RELATING TO: SPONSOR(S): TIED BILL(S): Comparative Fault/Negligence Cases Representatives Baker, Kottkamp, and others None

More information

The first prosecution of an NHS trust for corporate manslaughter

The first prosecution of an NHS trust for corporate manslaughter 1 The first prosecution of an NHS trust for corporate manslaughter 31/05/2016 Corporate Crime analysis: What should potential defendant NHS Trusts take from the ruling in R v Cornish and another? James

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/10/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/10/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/10/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/10/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/10/2016 02:54 PM INDEX NO. 190047/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/10/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X NORMAN DOIRON AND ELAINE

More information

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE If You are a Consumer, You have certain statutory rights regarding the return of defective Goods and claims in respect of losses caused by our negligence or failure to carry

More information

LONDON PHARMA & CHEMICALS GROUP LTD TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE

LONDON PHARMA & CHEMICALS GROUP LTD TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE LONDON PHARMA & CHEMICALS GROUP LTD TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1. The definitions and rules of interpretation set out below apply in these terms and conditions. Company: London Pharma

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN. And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN. And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT) REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2008-01684 BETWEEN DUKHARAN DHABAN CLAIMANT And THE PORT AUTHORITY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (PATT) THE SEAMEN AND WATERFRONT WORKER S TRADE

More information

Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University

Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Address: Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Horlock Building

More information

1. In these conditions ( these Conditions ) unless the context requires otherwise:

1. In these conditions ( these Conditions ) unless the context requires otherwise: CP Creative Ltd Terms & Conditions: Business to Business When using the services and/or purchasing content from CP Creative Ltd (and Lease Planners) you agree to be bound by the following terms and conditions,

More information

holder of a probationary driving licence is convicted under this

holder of a probationary driving licence is convicted under this (2) The court shall order particulars of any conviction under this section to be endorsed on any driving licence held by the person convicted. (4) A person convicted under this section shall be disqualified

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF :Versus:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF :Versus: 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9078-9079 OF 2017 Rani & Ors. :Versus: Appellant(s) National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors..Respondent(s) J U D G

More information

Legal Liability. Sophie Foyston ROB

Legal Liability. Sophie Foyston ROB Legal Liability Sophie Foyston ROB14236233 Contents Task 1... 3 Part 1 (P1 and P2)... 3 Neighbour Principle... 3 Duty of Care... 3 Breach of Duty... 3 Damage... 4 Compensation... 4 Part 2 (M1)... 5 Part

More information

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS- SALES OF GOODS & SERVICES. The buyer's attention is in particular drawn to the provisions of condition 10.4.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS- SALES OF GOODS & SERVICES. The buyer's attention is in particular drawn to the provisions of condition 10.4. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS- SALES OF GOODS & SERVICES. The buyer's attention is in particular drawn to the provisions of condition 10.4. 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1 The definitions and rules of interpretation

More information

Mediation v Informal Settlement Conference. And a look at the economics of early v later settlement on both sides

Mediation v Informal Settlement Conference. And a look at the economics of early v later settlement on both sides ABN 72 114 844 939 Karen@ADRmediation.com.au Tel 02 9223 2362 0418 292 283 5/82 Elizabeth Street Sydney NSW 2000 November 2017 Mediation v Informal Settlement Conference And a look at the economics of

More information

October 11, Drafting Committee, Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act (Fifth Tentative Draft)

October 11, Drafting Committee, Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act (Fifth Tentative Draft) October 11, 2001 To: From: Drafting Committee, Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act (Fifth Tentative Draft) Roger Henderson, Reporter Re: Seattle, Washington Drafting Committee Meeting, November

More information

The Labour Relations Agency Arbitration Scheme. Guide to the Scheme

The Labour Relations Agency Arbitration Scheme. Guide to the Scheme The Labour Relations Agency Arbitration Scheme Guide to the Scheme Labour Relations Agency The Labour Relations Agency is an independent, publicly funded organisation. Our job is to promote good employment

More information

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the ****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal

More information

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Customer (C) v. Businessman (B) Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Negligence requires a Breach of a Duty that Causes Damages. A. Duty B had a duty to drive as

More information

The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a

The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a The section Causation: Actual Cause and Proximate Cause from Business Law and the Legal Environment was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0

More information

Answer A to Question 10. To prevail under negligence, the plaintiff must show duty, breach, causation, and

Answer A to Question 10. To prevail under negligence, the plaintiff must show duty, breach, causation, and Answer A to Question 10 3) ALICE V. WALTON NEGLIGENCE damage. To prevail under negligence, the plaintiff must show duty, breach, causation, and DUTY Under the majority Cardozo view, a duty is owed to all

More information

Insolvency Act 1986 Page 1. Insolvency Act CHAPTER 45

Insolvency Act 1986 Page 1. Insolvency Act CHAPTER 45 Insolvency Act 1986 Page 1 Insolvency Act 1986 1986 CHAPTER 45 Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited. UK Statutes Crown Copyright. Reproduced by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

More information

Chapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy

Chapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy Chapter 2: Negligence: The Duty of Care General Principles and Public Policy Outline 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] 2.3 The three-stage test: foreseeability, proximity and fair, just

More information