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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll