header-logo header-logo

28 January 2022
Issue: 7964 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 28 January 2022

Compensation

TVZ and others v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2022] EWHC 7 (QB), [2022] All ER (D) 12 (Jan)

The Queen’s Bench Division dismissed the claimants’ claims, who sought compensation for sexual abuse perpetrated by A in the early 1980s when they were aged between 10 and 14 and playing for football teams coached by A. They claimed that A was working for the defendant and that it was liable for his conduct. The court held, among other things, that: (i) each claim had been brought more than 25 years after the expiry of the time limit. Each claimant had a good explanation for the delay, but it had meant that the evidence was less cogent than if the claims had been brought in time. That was, in part, because the key witness on a key issue had died in 2010. It was not fair, after all those years, to reach a binding determination on the defendant’s responsibility for the abuse based on the partial evidence that was still available. Therefore,

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll