header-logo header-logo

15 March 2013 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7552 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Employment
printer mail-detail

Stressing the point

97766624_1

Karen O’Sullivan provides an update on cases involving breach of duty & non-tortious causes

Claims for personal injury arising from stress at work are difficult and complex, often with minute consideration of specific facts as to what the employer did or didn’t do. One complexity is the common scenario where other factors in the claimant’s life have contributed to the breakdown in mental health.

This issue was recently visited in the Court of Appeal case of Brown v London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames [2012] All ER (D) 278 (Nov), although the court failed to produce definitive guidance as to how to treat the interaction between the employer’s breach of duty and non-tortious causes (in Mr Brown’s case, his marriage breakdown).

Unfortunately we have two separate dicta on the issue which are explicitly different, both from the Court of Appeal, and both obiter. In Hatton v Sunderland [2002] 2 All ER 1, Hale LJ suggested that the court should consider first whether the employer’s breach of duty was such that absent the breach,

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’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
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
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll