header-logo header-logo

Smash & bash at your peril

02 December 2011 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7492 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Damages , LexisPSL , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Karen O’Sullivan provides a crash course in the issues that arise around liability in road traffic litigation

Road traffic litigation is often looked down on by other litigators as being unchallenging when it comes to liability. The phrase “smash and bash” epitomises this perhaps intellectually snobbish view. There are no “six pack” regulations, for example, and causation is rarely a thorny issue. However, to the people involved in these sometimes horrific events the cases are certainly important. Not only are road accidents far more common than other types of accidents, they often cause the most serious injuries. They are therefore arguably the most important type of personal injury work, leading to the highest value claims.

Overruled?

Yet is it correct to take the view that RTA never has any interesting points of law on liability? The last few weeks have seen a clutch of reported cases, two of which are appeals suggesting that parties’ advisers are happy to assert that a judge has got a “simple” RTA

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
back-to-top-scroll