header-logo header-logo

25 February 2016
Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Negligence

Henegham (Son and Administrator of the Estate of James Leo Heneghan, Deceased) v Manchester Dry Docks Ltd and others [2016] EWCA Civ 86, [2016] All ER (D) 138 (Feb)

The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant’s appeal, held that it was not possible to infer from the epidemiological evidence that all or any of the defendants had made a material contribution to the deceased’s contracting of lung cancer. All of the defendants had, however, materially contributed to the risk that he would contract lung cancer and, therefore, the judge had been right to have applied the principle in Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd ([2002] 3 All ER 305).

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

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll