header-logo header-logo

Update from the courts

02 October 2008
Issue: 7339 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Christopher Russell unravels recent cases involving limitation and loss of chance

The dog days of August and September are often relatively fallow times for the evolution and development of personal injury law. However, a survey of judgments delivered, both in the Court of Appeal and the High Court, since the last of these updates reveals a clutch of cases addressing, among other things, limitation and loss of a chance.
Limitation

In Field v British Coal Corporation [2008] EWCA Civ 912, the court dealt with a claim for noise induced deafness. Field worked in Harworth Colliery for 21 years from 1982 when he was aged 16. He did a variety of jobs both above and below ground. Until 1995 his employer was British Coal. From an early age, and from at least 1985 when he was 19, Field had discomfort and temporary minor hearing loss which he attributed to wax and ear infections. In 2003 Field noted ringing in his ears and his wife complained that the TV was always too loud. Tests carried out by an ENT

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
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll