header-logo header-logo

17 May 2007 / Peter Gooderham
Issue: 7273 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Special treatment?

Peter Gooderham dissects the government’s proposed NHS redress scheme…and finds it wanting

The NHS Redress Act 2006 (NHSRA 2006) received Royal Assent on 8 November 2006. This provides for the establishment of the NHS redress scheme, which will be an alternative means of compensation to the clinical negligence system for some potential claimants. The details of the scheme will be contained within statutory instruments. NHSRA 2006 implements some of the recommendations of Making Amends (Department of Health, 2003).

The reliance on statutory instruments is a major feature of NHSRA 2006. They will be a source of interest to clinical negligence lawyers. The Department of Health seemingly wishes to consult before producing these.

DELIVERY OF TORT REFORM

Making Amends followed several calls for tort reform, notably from Sir Ian Kennedy in Learning from Bristol (Department of Health, 2001, Cm 5207), who recommended replacement of the clinical negligence system with a no-fault compensation scheme. NHSRA 2006, however, specifically requires, in s 1(2), a “qualifying liability in tort”. The government has preserved the Bolam/Bolitho test of the standard of

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll