Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Nick Leech and Andrew Sands consider ‘the Brexit Effect’ on compensation schemes

Brexit is taking the blame for much that is negative in the news, often for political purposes. However, the result of the recent referendum may well have thrown into doubt established case-law and the ability of the court to make an order for periodical payments in certain circumstances.

Paul Jones discusses the contentious world of CFA assignment

Assignment of conditional fee agreements (CFAs) continues to be a thorny topic in the costs world. With the changes in the personal injury market post Jackson, more and more cases find themselves transferred between different firms of solicitors and this is often done by way of an assignment of the existing CFA from the old solicitors to the new. Unfortunately, this area is fraught with potential problems and has generated a whole raft of case law and the recent decision in Azim v Tradewise Insurance Services [2016] can now be added to that list.

James Laughland highlights the case of Dr Brian May & Anita May v Wavell Group Plc & Dr Bizarri

In Dr Brian May & Anita May v Wavell Group Plc & Dr Bizarri [2016] costs were reduced from £208,000 down to £35,000. Another One Bites The Dust or The Show Must Go On? Failing miserably to resist the urge to include too many Queen song titles (Don’t Stop Me Now), the implications of this decision may well rock you.

Road traffic accident; foreseeability; breach of duty; Highway Code

Valley Road in Streatham is long and straight, largely residential in character albeit with some commercial premises on it, and it bears a speed limit of 30mph. On a clear evening with good visibility in June 2008 the defendant was travelling home along the road on his 125cc motorcycle. He was travelling at or slightly below 30mph.

Julian Matthews explores a defendant’s liability when there are multiple causes of a given loss

I have written recently in this journal about the potentially widespread ramifications of the case of Reaney v University Hospital of North Staffordshire [2015] (see ‘Reducing damages due to pre-existing conditions: a tenable argument?’, PILJ133, March 2015, p22 and ‘Material contribution to damage’, PILJ131, December 2014/January 2015, p17).

In part two of his article, Robert Weir QC continues his compilation of the most significant cases involving liability decisions from the last year

The second part of this article looks at the ways liability was established in clinical negligence, secondary victim cases and some other scenarios.

Independent occupational therapist Laura Slader outlines the role occupational therapy plays in brain injury litigation

Ask most people what an occupational therapist is and they will probably answer, ‘someone who helps people with their occupation’. Yet they usually do not know what this means. I work with people who have suffered injury or illness and need support to lead independent, productive and satisfying lives. I help them back into work or daily routines through the use of purposeful activity. My specialism is in the area of brain injury rehabilitation. My clients may have just been discharged from hospital or be referred to me a year or so later but are suffering mental, emotional and physical problems as a result of their injury. I help them re-learn the skills necessary to manage everyday tasks and work-related activities so they can adapt to their new condition. In order to achieve this, occupational therapy (OT) must take account of all aspects of a person’s life.

Matthew White weighs up the ‘but for’ test and material contribution in cumulative cause cases

An article in this publication in 2013 (‘Breach of duty and causation, where are we now?’ by Christopher Sharp QC and Matthew White, PILJ120, November 2013, p6) considered the circumstances in which the court will infer that a breach of duty caused a claimant’s loss. An issue left for another day was that of cases in which there were cumulative causes of injury.