header-logo header-logo

17 October 2009
Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bullying costs parents

The High Court has granted a third party costs order against the parents of a man who brought a negligence claim for nearly £1m against his former school for failing to prevent him being bullied.

The High Court has granted a third party costs order against the parents of a man who brought a negligence claim for nearly £1m against his former school for failing to prevent him being bullied.

The case of Thomson v Berkhamsted Collegiate School [2009] EWHC 2374 (QB) concerned a 25-year-old unemployed university graduate who tried to sue the private school, which he attended between 1994 and 2002, for injury, loss and damages. He dropped the case two weeks into the trial. The defendant had incurred estimated costs in excess of £250,000.

Delivering his judgment, Mr Justice Blake said that while this was “a case of family funding”, there was “a quantity of material indicating that the parents were not merely funders but were directly concerned with the facts of the claim, and promoting the remedies that they identified”.

He revisited the principles on third party costs as set out in Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Todd [2005] 4 All ER 195.
 

Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
back-to-top-scroll