header-logo header-logo

About time

24 February 2017 / Thomas Jervis , Jill Paterson
Issue: 7735 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_7735_pattreson

Jill Paterson & Thomas Jervis consider the High Court’s latest limitation decision

  • Unusual spinal injuries case in which the High Court granted permission for a product liability claim to continue following preliminary issue trial of limitation.

In Keith Malcolm Lewin v Glaxo Operations UK Limited [2016] EWHC 3331 (QB) the High Court has granted permission for a product liability claim to continue following a preliminary issue trial of limitation. In this unusual spinal injuries case, the court was asked to determine whether the claim was statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980.

Background

The claimant, a 59-year-old solicitor, is pursuing a product liability claim against an entity of the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline for alleged personal injuries and other consequential losses arising out of his exposure to Myodil, an oil based contrast medium, when he underwent a diagnostic myelogram procedure for back pain at Whiston Hospital in 1973. He was 15-years-old at that time. Mr Lewin is now severely disabled and requires the use of a large motorised wheelchair to mobilise after developing a serious spinal

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll