PIBULJ
An Unexpected Bill to Pay: Non-Party Costs Orders and Claims Management Companies - David Sawtell, 4 King's Bench Walk
16/11/12. Claims management and credit hire companies are often portrayed in a dim light; who better, then, to foot the bill for litigation pursuant to a non-party costs order? Despite (or perhaps even because) of such obvious temptations to the defendant insurance industry, the case law has leaned hard against draconian or procedurally deficient applications. If you are considering launching such an application, beware the heffalump traps.
A rough ride for the industry
The Ministry of Justice’s Claims Management Regulation Annual Report 2011/2012 stated that ‘The Claims Management Regulation (CMR) Unit continues to...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/pawel.gaul
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
When is a Protected Party Not a Protected Party? Never... for Now - Robert Vernon, 9 Park Place Chambers
16/11/12. Rule 21.10(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that: “Where a claim is made – (a) by or on behalf of a ... protected party; or (b) against a ... protected party, no settlement, compromise or payment ... and no acceptance of money paid into court shall be valid, so far as it relates to the claim by, on behalf of or against the ... protected party, without the approval of the court.”
What, though, is the position where a personal injury claim is issued and settled (even at the door of the court) in circumstances where the claimant was not known to be a protected party at the time the settlement was reached? One might reasonably have expected such a point to be the subject of authority but, until Bean J issued his judgment in Joanne Dunhill (A Protected Party by her Litigation Friend, Paul Tasker) v Burgin [2012] EWHC 3163 (QB) on 9 November 2012, apparently the issue had never been determined.
Image cc David Dixon
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
Paradigm Shift: Accident Prevention Becomes the Leading Priority for Public Health - Errol Taylor, RoSPA
16/11/12. For many years, those working to prevent unintentional (or ‘accidental’) injuries have faced an ongoing battle for public, private and voluntary sector resources because the number of deaths caused by accidents was simply not high enough compared to the “big killers” such as cancer, cardiovascular disease and respiratory disease...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/RapidEye
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
PI Practitioner, November 2012
15/11/12. Each issue a particular topic is highlighted, citing some of the useful cases and other materials in that area. You can also receive these for free by registering for our PI Brief Update newsletter. Simply fill in your email address at the top right of this website.
10% Increase in Awards of General Damages from 1st April 2013Simmons v Castle [2012] EWCA Civ 1039
On 26th July 2012 the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to give notice as to how...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/EmiliaU
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
Have the Victims of Jimmy Savile a Route to Damages From the Hospitals Involved? - Colm Nugent, Hardwicke
15/11/12. As the Department of Health awaits the outcome of the investigations into Jimmy Savile’s activities at Stoke Mandeville, Broadmoor and Leeds General Infirmary, the findings will have consequence for future civil actions. Pending the investigations there have been (unsubstantiated) reports that Nurses in at least one hospital were aware that Jimmy Savile was not dispensing just Lucozade and bonhomie.
There have been as yet unverified reports of nurses at one hospital advising the children to pretend to...
Image cc Dave Bevis
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
More Articles...
- Vicarious Liability: Are We Moving Away From Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215? - Sarah Prager, 1 Chancery Lane
- RTA Fraud: Guilty by Association? Not So Says the Court of Appeal - John-Paul Swoboda, 12 King’s Bench Walk
- Mediation or Negotiation - Steve Hancox, ADR Group Accredited Civil & Commercial Mediator
- Bringing Proceedings in Time - Andrew Roy, 12 King’s Bench Walk
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
