header-logo header-logo

Second chances & the relative (in)significance of Bailey

27 May 2022 / Claire Christopholus , David Locke
Issue: 7980 / Categories: Features , Clinical negligence
printer mail-detail
82845
Claire Christopholus & David Locke on a clinical negligence claim that ran again & the influence of Bailey
  • Reviews an attempt to bring a clinical negligence claim again, 16 years after it was discontinued, on the basis Bailey changed the law on material contribution.
  • Covers Astley v Mid-Cheshire Hospitals Foundation and refers to Bailey v Ministry of Defence.

In Astley v Mid-Cheshire Hospitals Foundation NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 337 (QB), Mr Justice Eyre refused the claimant’s application, made pursuant to CPR Pt 38.7, for permission to bring what was ostensibly the same claim against the defendant, some 16 years after the original claim had been discontinued. A key issue was whether the decision in Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] All ER (D) 382 (Jul), [2009] 1 WLR 1052 represented a change in the law.

Background

It was alleged Mr Astley suffered a brain injury as a consequence of a delay in his delivery, in 1997. Proceedings were issued in 2004 but were then discontinued

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll