header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 March 2007 / Helen Bell
Issue: 7263 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury , Employment
printer mail-detail

Personal injury update

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Employers' liability for occupational stress, Interpretation of the Uninsured Drivers' Agreement 1999, Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act 1980

STRESS AT WORK

In Daw v Intel Corp (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 70, [2007] All ER (D) 96 (Feb) the Court of Appeal considered, in the light of guidance previously provided by Lady Justice Hale (as she then was) in Hatton v Sutherland [2002] EWCA Civ 76, [2002] 2 All ER 10, what steps an employer must take to discharge its duty of care to an employee who is alleged to have suffered from occupational stress.

Tracy Daw had worked for Intel for around 13 years before she ceased work in June 2001 after a breakdown. She was initially employed by Intel as a finance assistant, during which time she had two periods off work because of postnatal depression.

Daw was subsequently promoted to mergers and acquisitions payroll integration analyst which required her to integrate into Intel’s payroll
employees acquired as a result of company takeovers. This was accepted to be a

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
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll