header-logo header-logo

14 May 2009 / Helen Wolstenholme
Issue: 7369 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Accidental malice

Helen Wolstenholme reports on genuine accidents & deliberate contempt

* * * * * *

April was a good month for defendant personal injury practitioners:

      
      ●     The Court of Appeal gave judgment in favour of the defendant to a personal injury claim in two cases where the key issue was the standard of care owed by one individual to another; and

      
      ●     in an unusual case and the first of its kind, an individual was found to be in contempt of court as a result of false statements which she had made during the course of personal injury proceedings which had been compromised after the disclosure of surveillance evidence.

In Orchard v Lee [2009] EWCA Civ 295, Mrs Orchard appealed against a decision of HHJ Iain Hughes QC, sitting at Poole County Court, dismissing her claim for personal injury against a 13-year-old schoolboy. Mrs Orchard was a lunchtime supervisor at the school, and was injured when the boy was playing tag with another boy and ran backwards into her. The accident

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll