header-logo header-logo

02 September 2010 / Kenneth Warner
Issue: 7431 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Call of duty

Kenneth Warner highlights the courts’ reluctance to invoke a duty of care for unconventional forms of damage

In the modern era, with the dramatic extension of paternalistic functions delegated to local authorities, we have seen a commensurate exposure of these bodies to liability under the principles of negligence law. Where the damage in issue comprises the standard sort of direct physical injury, the situation is a straightforward one, and the standard negligence enquiry ensues.

More recently however, other types of damage, which may yet be regarded as personal injury, have presented a much more complex circumstance. Litigation has been pursued against public authorities in relation to a range of other types of harm, including psychiatric illness (D v E Berkshire NHS Trust [2005] 2 AC 373, [2005] 2 WLR 993); physical and emotional neglect and suffering (X v Bedfordshire CC); enforced separation of young child from mother (M v Newham BC); failure to diagnose dyslexia in a young child (E v Dorset DC); failure to provide a child

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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