Robert Oldham, pupil barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk, highlights the lessons for practitioners in Townsend v Corporation of Trinity … More
Author: Editor, PI Blog
Doughty v Kazmierski: contributory negligence of motorcyclist in a four-vehicle collision
Steven Snowden KC secures a finding of 25% contributory negligence in the liability-only trial of a road traffic accident where … More
To stay or not to stay – medical examination and fairness between the parties
HHJ Gargan in Clarke v Poole and others [2024] EWHC 1509 (KB) held that the Claimant’s claim for future losses, … More
Strike-out on the basis of facts, not law
Lukes v Kent & Medway NHS Trust is an instructive illustration of whether strike-out applications can succeed on factual grounds against either healthcare or police defendants in the context of claims for provision of negligent mental health treatment/assessment.
Clark v Adams: personal injury claim against Gerry Adams to proceed to trial
An application to strike out personal injury claims arising out of the Troubles succeeded in part. The case raises unusual … More
Wasted costs and witness statement requirements for non-English speakers
Liability for Negligent or Reckless Tackles: Elbanna v Clark
Megan Griffiths and Spencer Turner consider the recent High Court decision of Elbanna v Clark [2024] EWHC 627 (KB), a case in which a rugby tackle was found to have been negligent.
Criminal injuries compensation and “Daisy’s Law”
Jessica Muurman, pupil barrister at 12KBW, analyses the recent judgment in R (Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority) v First-tier Tribunal v GHI [2024] … More
Ex turpi defence fails where claimant acquitted for insanity: Lewis-Ranwell v G4S in the Court of Appeal
Megan Griffiths and Achas Burin look at the defence of illegality as analysed in the recent Court of Appeal decision, Lewis-Ranwell v G4S Health and others [2024] EWCA Civ 138. The Court of Appeal found by a majority of 2-1 that a claimant acquitted of murder by reason of insanity was not prohibited from bringing a negligence action because, although they had committed a criminal act, they had not been deemed criminally responsible for it and it would be contrary to public policy to debar them.
12KBW Personal Injury Law Blog 