I'm interested in…

  • Strategy & Procedure
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Professional Indemnity
  • Motor
  • Fraud
  • Disease
  • Liability
  • Commercial Insurance
  • Costs
  • Local Authority
  • Scotland

Case watch

Fatal accident – Germany

This DWF Fishburns case of Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG concerns the basis upon which damages should be assessed in a fatal accident claim, where the accident took place in Germany.  The case was heard by the Supreme Court on 20 and 21 January 2014.  Judgment is expected to be delivered next month.

Catastrophic injury: Capacity to litigate

Dunhill v Burgin concerns issues of whether a claimant had capacity at the time of settlement and whether the requirement for court approval under CPR 21.10 applies even if at the time of settlement the claimant was not known to lack capacity. The Supreme Court heard this appeal at the beginning of the month and judgment is expected sometime in May.

Disease: Mesothelioma

Further to the report in December’s Insurance Brief by Daren Charlton in McDonald v Department for Communities & Local Government & National Grid, on the 12 and 13 February, the Supreme Court heard the second defendant’s appeal on the applicability of Regulation 2(a) of the Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931 to factories not engaged in the manufacture of asbestos products but making lagging paste for insulation in a power station and the cross-appeal as to whether the appellant was in breach of a statutory duty owed to the respondent under s 47 Factories Act 1937 because a substantial quantity of dust had been present on his visits.  Judgment is expected in March/April 2014.

Professional risks: Solicitors duty of care

In September’s Insurance Brief, Helen Smith reported on the case of Feltham v FreerBouskell which concerned a solicitor’s duty to a potential beneficiary of a will under the principle set out by the House of Lords in White v Jones back in 1995. The Defendants have appealed the decision of Charles Hollander QC to the Court of Appeal and the appeal is set to be heard on 13 or 14 March 2014.

Procedure: CPR 3.9

The defendants have appealed the order debarring them from relying upon expert evidence on the basis that they failed to comply with a direction for exchange of expert evidence.  We await the date for the appeal. Chambers v Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust (2013) 

Contact

For further information please contact Fiona James, Director, Professional Support Lawyer on 0191 233 5220 or Marcus Davies, Professional Support Executive on 0161 603 5146

This information is intended as a general discussion surrounding the topics covered and is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. DWF is not responsible for any activity undertaken based on this information.

Top