In this blog, Megan Griffiths of 12KBW considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in DJ v Barnsley on the first…
Employment and personal injury case brought by trainee naval cadet struck out
Robert Oldham, pupil barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk, highlights the lessons for practitioners in Townsend v Corporation of Trinity…
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…
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,…
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…
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]…
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 