Forbes Solicitors
Insurance eNews  December 2019

Landmark Judgment - Dishonest witness statements made in Pre-Action Protocol can be subject of contempt proceedings

 

Council fined £1.4m after child suffers life-changing head injury on a street bollard

 

Forbes at Trial: Claims History Successfully used to Discredit Claimant


Landmark Judgment - Dishonest witness statements made in Pre-Action Protocol can be subject of contempt proceedings

Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v (1) K Hughes (2) L Hughes (2019)[2019] EWCA Civ 1858

The Court of Appeal has confirmed that false witness statements verified by a statement of truth, made in compliance with a pre-action protocol (PAP), can give rise to an application for committal for contempt.

The background

Karl and Laura Hughes alleged that they had contracted food poisoning whilst on holiday as a result of eating contaminated food and drink and swimming in the hotel’s insanitary swimming pool.  They brought claims under the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tour Regulations 1992 and the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

Council fined £1.4m after child suffers life-changing head injury on a street bollard

Hampshire County Council has been fined £1.4 million and ordered to pay costs of £130,632 after being found in breach of s.3 (1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.  In December 2015, a six-year-old girl had climbed on to a cast iron hinged bollard when it fell to the ground taking her with it.  According to the HSE, she suffered life-changing head injuries as a result of the accident and spent six months in hospital in a critical condition. 

Read more

 

Read more


Undercover – Court allows claimant to rely on covert recordings of medical examinations

Samantha Mustard v (1) Jamie Flower (2) Stephen Flower (3) Direct Line Insurance [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB)

A defendant insurer in a personal injury claim applied to exclude the claimant’s covert recordings of medical examinations with the defendant’s experts and to set aside excessive Part 35 questions.

The facts

The claim arises out of a road traffic accident, which took place in January 2014.  The claimant alleged that as a result of the accident she sustained a sub-arachnoid brain hemorrhage and a diffuse axonal brain injury, which left her with cognitive and other deficits.

 

Regulatory Update – December

  • Council fined £1.4m after child suffers life-changing head injury on a street bollard
  • Farming partnership fined after member of public fatally injured
  • University fined after research workers exposed to risk of suffering adverse health effects
  • Exposure to welding fume – HSE issues revised guidance

Read more

 

Read more


Forbes at Trial: Wilson v The Co-operative Group

The Claimant was shopping in a supermarket when she alleged that she tripped on the upturned edge of a mat situated on the vegetable aisle.  She fell forwards and sustained soft tissue injuries.

The Claimant alleged that the upturned edge of the mat was a reasonably foreseeable tripping hazard, which posed a real source of danger.  The Defendant denied that the cause of her fall was the anti-slip matting placed on the aisle.  The Defendant disclosed CCTV evidence, which clearly showed that the mat was flat to the ground as the Claimant approached.  The CCTV recording further showed the Defendant’s staff attend to the Claimant when she was on the ground.  There was no need for any staff member to adjust the mat or to correct its position.  The accident was recorded by staff and no mention was made to suggest that the mat had been the cause of the accident and no such complaint was made by the Claimant. 

 

Forbes at Trial: Claims History Successfully used to Discredit Claimant

Evidence uncovered relating to a claimant’s claims history led to the dismissal of his claim for personal injury following an alleged trip in a carriageway pothole.

The facts

The Claimant alleged that as he crossed the road, his foot went into a pothole, and he injured his ankle.

 

Read more

 

Read more


Forbes at Trial: Claim Misses the Target

A Claimant who was injured whilst attempting to move an archery target has lost her claim at trial.

The facts

The Defendant provided archery facilities and training sessions.  The Claimant was a keen archer and attended sessions on a regular basis.  Prior to an archery class starting, the Claimant chose to move one of the target stands.  In doing so, the stand collapsed on to her hand and she sustained an injury.

The Claimant alleged that the Defendant was negligent and in breach of s.2 Occupiers Liability Act 1957.

 

Forbes at Trial: In Deep Water - The Pitfalls of Suing an Unincorporated Association

L v The Trustees of Anon Angling Society

A claimant has had his claim for personal injury struck out after the Court found there was no legal basis for the claim.

Background

Claims against unincorporated member associations must be carefully considered as was illustrated by a recent success of Forbes Solicitors.

Read more

 

Read more


 

Forbes' Insurance Team Wins National Personal Injury Awards Accolade

We are delighted to have won Defendant Team of the Year at the UK's prestigious Personal Injury Awards for the second year running.

The Personal Injury Awards, which have been running for 12 years, provide a unique opportunity to highlight and celebrate the excellence of individuals and organisations across the personal injury sector.

Forbes were congratulated by judge Angela Kerr BABICM, who said the Team "impressed the judges with their handling and success in complex cases, teamwork, care of their clients and pro bono work."

 

Read more


Forbes Appoints Gemma Duxbury as Senior Associate in Governance, Procurement and Information

Gemma advises on a full spectrum of contractual, procurement and governance matters, focusing mainly on Public Sector and Local Government.

Read more


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   ·   Terms & Conditions

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

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. GDPR

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