header-logo header-logo

Sound the alarm

27 November 2015 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7678 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
nlj_7678_osullivan

Considering the liability of emergency vehicles is a difficult balancing act for the courts, says Karen O’Sullivan

The Court of Appeal recently considered the issue of liability of emergency vehicles in the case of MacLeod v Commissioner for Metropolitan Police [2015] EWCA Civ 688, [2015] All ER (D) 98 (Jul). Although that case is not the most helpful, being an appeal against findings of facts (hence the appeal was, perhaps not surprisingly, dismissed), it does give us cause to remind ourselves of the law relating to emergency vehicles.

In considering liability, the courts have to perform a difficult balancing act. On one hand, those injured in collisions with emergency services should not be denied compensation, simply because the other vehicle was on an emergency call. On the other hand, if the courts are too liberal with the emergency services’ money, not only will the taxpayer have to foot the bill, but the drivers of such vehicles will be inhibited in their attempts to reach the scene of an emergency promptly.

Duty of care

The first guiding

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