To see an HTML version of this email please click on the following link, or copy it and paste into the address bar of your Internet browser: https://www.forbessolicitors.co.uk/newsletters/Insurance-eNews-August-2016.htm
Forbes Solicitors
Newsletter

Insurance eNews August 2016

Welcome to Forbes' Insurance eNewsletter

Our aim is to keep you updated on the latest news and legal developments. We will also keep you updated on our latest seminars, conferences and un-missable practical guides on a range of insurance issues. 

The Forbes' Insurance Team

Forbes Insurance Blog

We also regularly post blogs to keep you updated with the latest news and developments.  To receive notification of when our blogs are posted, please click here to subscribe.

Under Pressure of Proportionality

Since the new ‘proportionality test’ was introduced on 1 April 2013, we have been left wondering how it will work in practice.  There is no guidance as to how the principle should operate in practice.  Cases on this issue are now beginning to emerge, but is the position any clearer?...to read the full article, please click here.

School Wins Hockey Mouthguard Claim

Megan Murray v Mark Mccullough as Nominee on Behalf of the Trustees and on Behalf of the Board of Governors of Rainey Endowed School [2016] NIQB 52

The claimant was 15 when she was struck with a hockey stick whilst playing in a match for her school.  She was not wearing a mouth guard and she sustained serious dental injuries, together with a cut to her upper lip...to read the full article, please click here.

FOIA request – is information held?

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) entitles anyone to make a request to a public authority for information. Providing the request is in writing, the requester is not required to specify why he or she wants the information and the public authority is required to assess it and respond accordingly within 20 working days...to read the full article, please click here.

Supreme Court Allows Landlord’s Appeal in Edwards v Kumarasamy but doesn’t decide all issues!

The Supreme Court has handed down its long awaited judgment unanimously allowing Mr Kumarasamy's appeal. The Court found that although Mr Kumarasamy had a sufficient "interest" in the front hallway and paved area for the purposes of section 11(1A)(a) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ("LTA"), he was not liable for the disrepair which caused Mr Edwards's injury, as he could only be liable if the paved area was "part of the exterior of the front hall", and if he had received notice of the disrepair before the accident...to read the full article, please click here.

Forbes at Trial

Bogus Invoice Rumbled at Trial

At a small claims hearing, the claimant’s claim for vehicle damage following an alleged collision with a pothole was dismissed in full. The Judge found that whilst the defect was actionable and dangerous at the time of the claimant’s accident, the defendant’s section 58 defence was robust and stood up to proof....to read the full article, please click here.

Claim Stumped at Trial

The Claimant attended a play area owned by the local authority with her grandchildren.  Whilst taking photographs of her family, she stepped backwards and tripped over a low post which formed part of the playground and sustained personal injury...to read the full article, please click here.

Insurance Department offices in Leeds, Manchester and Blackburn

Head Office Rutherford House, 4 Wellington Street (St John's), Blackburn, BB1 8DD
where a list of partners is open to inspection.

This firm is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA No. 46408) ·

VAT No. 174 394 344 · Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter    RSS News Feed RSS news feed    www.forbesinsurance.co.uk  |  Insurance Blog

You are receiving this email because you recently requested to receive our updates by email.
If you no longer wish to receive these updates from us please click here to unsubscribe.

The content of this e-alert is merely informative and should not be relied upon as a substitute for legal advice