Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Brian Dempsey examines the rigid application of the fixed recoverable fees regime

In 2013, the government introduced a myriad of changes to the rules at a breakneck speed, not only those giving effect to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 but also major changes to the Protocols and the Civil Procedure Rules themselves.

Julian Matthews looks at recent case law on the issue of consent to medical treatment including the recent Court of Appeal decision of Webster

Legal and medical practitioners alike recognised that the decision of the Supreme Court in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] represented a major change in the approach to be adopted when dealing with the issue of consent to medical treatment. What was not wholly apparent was how the principles set out in Montgomery would be applied in practice. There was a genuine concern that the apparently clear principles would be undermined by first instance courts who might feel that the consequence of applying the principles was in some way ‘unfair’ to medical professionals, and would try and re-introduce some elements of the ‘Bolam’ test in order to restrict liability, particularly in relation to assessing what information ought to be provided to the patient at the time any consent to treatment was taken. The Court of Appeal has now delivered its first decision in a consent case since Montgomery, which gives a real pointer to lower courts and practitioners on the extent to which the Montgomery principles will be observed, and how they should be applied in difficult cases.

Contaminated food; package travel holidays; reasonable care; transfer of goods

This important package travel case represents a significant coup for claimants in the context of food poisoning cases. Although the package travel industry will be disappointed by the court’s decision, comments in the judgment suggest a demanding approach to establishing causation on the evidence.

Patrick West explores the test of fundamental dishonesty

In the film Pirates of the Caribbean, Jack Sparrow said:

Adam Ohringer considers the effects of the Supreme Court ruling in Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc

The concept that an employer is vicariously liable for the wrongdoing of its employees has its roots in antiquity. The employer takes the benefit of the employee’s activities and so it is only fair that it should bear the risks. The controversial issue which the courts have wrestled with is the precise location of the boundary between activities which are in the course of employment, for which the employer is vicariously liable, and activities which are personal to the employee, for which only the employee is liable.

Helen Thompson sets out the possible legal remedies after sepsis is misdiagnosed or not recognised

In recent years, cases of patient deaths due to incorrect diagnosis and delayed treatment of sepsis have caught the attention of the media. According to the UK Sepsis Trust, there are around 150,000 cases of sepsis each year, of which 30% prove fatal. An independent report by the National Confidential Enquiry into patient outcome and death revealed delays in identifying sepsis in more than a third of cases.

Liam Ryan discusses claims in the Employment Tribunal and County Court and abuse of process

When dealing with stress at work cases one of the first issues that needs to be considered is in which forum (County or High Court as opposed to the Employment Tribunal) should a claimant bring their claim? In cases where a claimant has suffered psychiatric injury, issues that can arise with such an injury, such as an inability to engage with legal advisors, can naturally direct a claimant to pursuing a claim for personal injury in the County or High Court as opposed to seeking remedies in the Employment Tribunal due to limitation issues.

Rushmi Sethi examines clinical negligence claims concerning ophthalmic injuries

The purpose of this article is to consider the recent case law relating to eye injury claims, considering in particular the medico-legal aspects that lawyers should be aware of. This article is also based upon research I carried out regarding treatment for eye injuries with Professor Claoue, consultant opthalmic surgeon.