The Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Pod from St John’s Chambers

Paul v Royal Wolverhampton. The end to secondary victim claims in clinical negligence?

In this podcast, James Marwick and Justin Valentine discuss the Supreme Court decision in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton which has definitively closed the door on secondary victim claims in clinical negligence in the context of delayed diagnosis where the breach in duty was many weeks or months before, in each case, the tragic death of the family member.  The Supreme Court has followed Taylor v Novo in finding that in order to recover, a family member must be present at the "accident".  Doubt remains whether a secondary victim claim could be advanced where the family member is present at the breach of duty if that breach can be couched in terms of an accident.

The latest developments in lost years claims for children

Christopher Sharp KC and Ben Handy of St John's Chambers Personal Injury team discuss the latest developments in lost years claims for children, reflecting on their history, their relationship to dependency claims under the Fatal Accidents Act, and the disconnect between the quantification of claims brought during and after a claimants’ lifetime. They consider the practical impact of that on advice and strategy and offer some thoughts on how to mitigate the problems that can arise as a result. 

Links to the related articles mentioned in this episode:

• The lost years
• Early settlement or deferred trial in child brain injury claims

 

Galbraith plus: How safe is safe?

We hear the term Galbraith plus used all the time in the Coroner’s Court but when was the last time you looked into what the test really requires a Coroner to do and what threshold it puts into place? Off the back of the case of Officer B50, Louise Asprey and Lauren Karmel of our Inquests & Public Inquiries team answer these questions in this podcast. 

Damages claims portal

Rachel Segal and Matthew White of our Personal Injury team discuss an issue arising out of the use of practice of the damages claims portal.

Rachel and Matthew were against each other in a case earlier this year which included many procedural problems all springing from the fact that the DCP is full of trip wires. They will discuss the issues and steer you on how to avoid the pitfalls.

The is a DCP is a pilot scheme which is intended to clarify, simplify and streamline the litigation in a large number of claims in the court system.

Article 2: Maguire

In this podcast, Louise Asprey and Lauren Karmel of our Inquests & Public Inquiries team review the Supreme Court decision handed down earlier this year and the clarification that it provides in respect of the application of article 2. Whilst this case dealt with the application within a healthcare setting, it assists in a consideration of the application of article 2 generally.

The intermediate track and fixed costs: the essentials and all the latest updates

In this podcast, James Marwick and Jonathan Lindfield of our Personal Injury team discuss the introduction of the intermediate track and the wider application of fixed costs to higher value cases. 

This podcast will address the essentials of the new regime and how it might affect your day to day work as a personal injury practitioner. 

The podcast will also discuss some of the proposed updates already in the pipeline for the regime as well as the upcoming changes likely to be introduced for clinical negligence work. 

Part 36 - unjust or only just?

On this podcast, James Hughes and David Forster of St John's Chambers Personal Injury team consider recent case law developments regarding Part 36 offers in personal injury litigation.  Specifically, David and James look at when the courts have decided that it would be unjust to apply the normal Part 36 consequences for the late acceptance of an offer and the effect of Mundy v TUI [2023] EWHC 385 (CH) on split liability Part 36 offers. 

Cosmetic surgery litigation

On this podcast, Rhodri Jones and Rachel Segal of St John's Chambers Personal Injury team have a whistle-stop discussion of some general issues and principles associated with cosmetic surgery litigation.  This taster session includes a brief overview of relevant recent authorities such as Laura Clarke v Adam Kaleciński & Others [2022] EWHC 488 (QB).