header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 September 2022 / Wendy Laws
Issue: 7995 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

Negligence after Meadows & Manchester

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
94715
Dr Wendy Laws provides an invaluable guide to interpreting negligence cases
  • The Supreme Court in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK and Meadows v Khan set down six framework questions for analysing claims in negligence.
  • Do those questions represent a novel freestanding framework, or can they be integrated with a more conventional approach, to form a coherent overall structure for the analysis of claims in negligence?

In this article I ask how we should understand the structure of a claim in negligence after the decisions in: Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20, [2021] UKSC 20, [2021] 4 All ER 1 and Meadows v Khan [2021] UKSC 21, [2021] 4 All ER 65.

The Supreme Court set down six framework questions for analysing claims in negligence—but do those questions represent a novel freestanding framework, or can they be integrated with a more conventional approach to form a coherent overall structure for the analysis of claims in negligence?

Manchester/Meadows concerned

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
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?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
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
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
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
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll