22 February 2007 - Industry News

DAS to set up its own law firm…
www.lawgazette.co.uk/home.law

Solicitors are reported to be bidding for client lists from insurers…
www.claimscouncil.org/news/

…and the police have a role in assisting the insurers contacting the clients!
www.claimscouncil.org/news/

In a deal worth £36m, Liverpool Victoria acquires Britannia Rescue…
www.britanniarescue.com/news/

FSA fines GE Capital Bank Ltd £610,000 for failing to have adequate systems and control for selling insurance…
www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/

MIB warn of an increase in bankruptcies in 2007…

AA British Insurance Premium Index shows premiums at their highest ever in Q4 2006…
www.theaa.com/services/insuranceandfinance/

29 August 2008 - PI Practitioner

Workplace Slipping

Workplace (Health, Safety & Welfare) Regulations 1992

Regulations 12 (1) (2) and (3)

McCondichie v Mains Medical Centre
[2004] Rep. L.R.4; [2003] G.W.D. 35-993

Employer’s liability; ice in medical practice car park; applicability of Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 to persons other than employees;

Car park is part of the workplace. Regulation 12 (3) does not require the risk of slippage to be eliminated entirely, merely that the employer take reasonable steps to minimise the risk

Ellis v Bristol City Council
[2007] EWCA Civ 685

Workplace; floors; strict liability under Regulation 12 (1) and (2); Approved Code of Practice; slipping on urine on floor

Merseyside Fire & Civil Defence Authority v Bassie
[2005] EWCA Civ 1474

Workplace slipping; Regulation 12 (3); fireman slipping on layer of fine dust.

Dust on the floor was a substance which might cause a person to slip and it was reasonably practicable to keep the floor clear of dust by mopping. Breach of Regulation 12 (3).

Lewis v Avidan Ltd (T/A High Meadow Nursing Home)
[2005] EWCA Civ 670

Employer’s Liability; Slipping on unexpected flood water from a concealed pipe; Regulations 5 and 12 of the Workplace Regulations

The workplace included the floor on which the Claimant slipped but not the water pipe itself. No breach of Regulation 5 as the floor had been maintained in an efficient state. No breach of Regulation 12 (3) as not reasonably practicable for the employer to have acted differently.

31 December 2009 - PI Practitioner

Asia Pacific (HK) Ltd & ORS -v- (1) Hanjin Shipping Company Ltd (2) Owners of the MV Hanjin Pennsylvania (2005) EWHC 2443

When a claim form was delivered to the recipient in a manner provided for by the rules it was served unless it was made clear by the person who delivered it that whilst he was delivering the form by such a method he was not in fact serving it.

Susan Horn -v- Dorset Healthcare NHS Trust (No 2) (2004)

The power of the court to dispense with service under CPR r. 6.9 was exceptional and only to be used in the rarest of cases

Jon Olafsson -v- Hannes Holmsteinn Gissurarson (No 2) (2006) EWHC 3214 (QB)

It was appropriate to make an order dispensing with service of the claim form and particulars of claim where there had been a technical failure to comply with foreign rules concerning service of documents and the defendant accepted he had received the appropriate documents

(1) Nutifafa Kuenyehia (2) Doris Enyonam (as Executors and Trustees of the Estate of Emmanuel Kwame Ashiagbor, Deceased) (3) Lartisan Services Inc -v- International Hospitals Group Ltd (2006) EWCA Civ 21

It required an exceptional case before the court would exercise its power to dispense with service under CPR r.6.9 and the power was unlikely to be exercised save where the Claimant had either made an ineffective attempt to serve by one of the methods permitted by r.6.2 or had served in time in a manner which involved a minor departure form one of the permitted methods of service. The failure to comply with the requirement to obtain written consent to serve by fax in para. 3.1(1) of the CPR Part 6 Practice Direction could not fairly be characterised as no more than a minor departure from the provisions of CPR r.6.2(1)(e).