Mum gets €25k after Holles St baby death

THE mother of a baby girl who died six days after her birth has settled her action for medical negligence against the National Maternity Hospital, Holles Street.

Suzanne Dunne (37), of Castlemoyne, Balgriffin, Dublin, had brought proceedings following the death of her baby daughter Alena on April 8, 2006.

She had claimed damages for negligence, breach of agreement and breach of duty of care.

She had also claimed damages for mental distress on her own behalf and on behalf of her husband Paul, son Daire and Alena’s maternal and paternal grandparents. The hospital denied the claims. Read more at www.herald.ie

Lords revolt raises legal aid concessions hopes

Hopes are emerging that the government will amend at least some of its legal aid reforms after peers voiced overwhelming criticism this week.

Indeed the Mirror has today reported that justice secretary Ken Clarke has ditched the proposal to remove legal aid for clinical negligence claims.

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill passed its second reading in the House of Lords after an eight-hour battering on Monday. Only three of the 54 peers who spoke offered support.

Labour’s former legal aid minister Lord Bach told the Gazette that the debate was ‘a good start for those of us who want to see changes made’. There was an ‘overwhelming feeling’ that the government has got it wrong on part 1 of the bill, which introduces the legal aid reforms, he said.

During the debate the bill faced an onslaught from peers calling the cuts in scope ‘catastrophic’, a ‘huge assault on access to justice’, and ‘constitutionally wrong’.

They said the bill attacked the rights of the sick, vulnerable, bereaved and injured, and will ‘bring shame on our legal system’, undermine the rule of law and result in a ‘flood of litigants in person’. Read more at www.lawgazette.co.uk

Ex-policewoman’s battle for payout after accident

A former policewoman who says her career in the force was ruined by the trauma of a road crash as a squad car rushed to attend an emergency is battling for compensation.

Miss Lyons, now 34, was left so badly injured and traumatised by the accident that she had to be medically retired in 2009 and has returned to live with her parents in her native Armagh.

Although the force is not disputing liability for the accident, it is hotly contesting the payout claim of over £500,000. Caroline Harrison, for the force, argues Miss Lyons’ mental health was already vulnerable before the crash. Read more at www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk

Will those legal aid lawyers stop at nothing? Chris Gawne, Medical Negligence Partner and birth injury specialist at Pannone examines the spin behind the removal of legal aid for medical negligence cases.

“In the lobbying of this house and the upper house we have had an army of lawyers advancing behind a front row of women and children – vulnerable claimants who say they would not be represented if they are not paid as much as they are now. I am afraid I do not believe that.” Kenneth Clarke – Justice Secretary

Referring to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill (LASPO) which will be debated by the House of Lords in the coming weeks, this is the view of the Justice Secretary who suggested in a House of Commons debate that we solicitors are using vulnerable clients as a front to protect our own interests. Has the sharp legal mind of the Justice Secretary rumbled clinical negligence lawyers? Is it all a sham?

“Let me make it plain that cutbacks in legal aid are contrary to the recommendations in my report… of all the proposed cutbacks in legal aid, the removal of legal aid from clinical negligence is the most unfortunate.” Jackson LJ, 5 September 2011, Cambridge.

Even the body which represents NHS Trusts in medical negligence litigation is in favour of retaining legal aid for medical negligence claims: “We question whether CFAs are likely to be readily available to fund many of the more serious claims currently brought via legal aid, particularly those involving brain damaged children and adults…Overall we are strongly in favour of retaining legal aid for clinical negligence cases using current eligibility criteria.” NHS Litigation Authority, Response to MOJ Consultation on the Reform of Legal Aid Read more at charonqc.wordpress.com

Work Accident Injury Claims Due to Defective Work Equipment

An employee who is injured at work as a direct result of the use of a piece work equipment that turns out to be defective may sue his employer for damages by reason of breach of Regulation 5 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

Regulation 5 imposes an absolute obligation to maintain work equipment in an “efficient state”, in an “efficient work order” and in “good repair”. In other words if an employee is injured because of an inherent defect in equipment, the employer will be held responsible regardless of fault.

From a layman’s point of view it is easy to make the assumption that such types of accident claims are straight forward and relatively easy to determine. However, whilst this may be true for many kinds of accidents that arise as a result of faulty equipment at work, in this article I’m going to demonstrate that from a lawyer’s perspective the underlying issues that determine whether the employer is liable for an injury at work can be quite complex and problematic. Read more at ezinearticles.com

Referral fee ban will hit PI claimants - says MoJ assessment

Personal injury claimants could suffer from a ban on referral fees while insurers and lawyers would incur no extra costs, according to the government department proposing the ban.

An impact assessment of the proposed ban, published today by the Ministry of Justice, admits that ‘overall claimants might lose out’ from a ban on referral fees in personal injury cases, with individuals expected to be affected more than businesses.

However, lawyers are likely to incur no net additional costs, while insurers are expected to gain overall.

The report was compiled a month ago following the government’s decision to prohibit the payment and receipt of referral fees through a provision in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill (LASPO).

The impact assessment says: ‘Some potential claimants may lose out if their claim is not brought forward without referral fees being paid, although there would be nothing to stop them contacting a lawyer directly to see if they have a valid claim. Read more at www.lawgazette.co.uk

The Importance For Accident Victims In Making Early Part 36 Offers To Settle Personal Injury Claims

There are many strategies that a seasoned litigator can deploy to improve the respective bargaining position of their client and improve prospects of success.

For example, UK Civil Procedure Rules permit either party to a claim to make what are called Part 36 offers to settle a claim. A smart solicitor, either for the Claimant or Defendant, will often make a Part 36 offer at the earliest possible opportunity in order to gain some strategic advantage in relation to potential costs and interests.

Court rules specify that were a party makes a Part 36 offer, which the opposing party refuses to accept, the party making the Part 36 offer is entitled to claim his costs for the period after the offer was made, plus additional interest on those costs if he obtains a court order that is more favourable than his offer. The design of Part 36 is to encourage the parties to make early invitations to settle and endeavour to conclude the dispute at the earliest opportunity, thereby saving on costs.

It will therefore be in both litigation parties’ interests to set out their case at the earliest opportunity with an indication of their bottom line figure that they are prepared to settle for. Offers to settle that are expressed to be in accordance with Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules is a means for a party to the litigation of raising the stakes, as it will effectively be saying to the opposing party “here is our best offer, if you refuse this offer you pay the consequences if the court later makes an order that is less favourable than the offer that we have made”. Read more at ezinearticles.com

Cyclist deaths: Paula Jurek Inquest delayed as police consider charging HGV driver

AN inquest into the death a young woman cyclist in Camden Town failed to go ahead because police are still deciding whether to charge the lorry driver involved in the incident.

Paula Jurek (pictured), a travel and tourism student at London Metropolitan University, died under the wheels of a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) at the junction of Camden Road with St Pancras Way in April.

The inquest into the 20-year-old’s death had been scheduled for last Thursday at St Pancras Coroner’s Court.

The 65-year-old lorry driver was arrested on suspicion of causing death by careless driving and later bailed.

A spokesman for the Met Police said on Monday that seven months later there was “no update” on the investigation.

It is thought Ms Jurek was caught as she rode on the left side of the truck. Read more at www.camdennewjournal.com

Costume designer who fell off staircase sues for £300,000

A costume designer who fell off a staircase on a film set is suing the National Film and Television School for damages of more than £300,000.

Sunwoo Chun, 37, had just adjusted an actor’s trousers, standing at the top of unprotected stairs, when she stepped back and fell three metres to the ground, fracturing her spine in three places.

She needed surgery on her spine, and is now paralysed from the chest down, with pain in both legs and in her back, and muscle spasms.

She brands the company negligent, and says it failed to provide suitable handrails, allowed her to work on the stairs when it was unsafe, failed to warn her of the dangers, failed to provide a safe system of work, and failed to take adequate care for her safety. Read more at www.telegraph.co.uk

NHS Clinical Negligence Caused 8,000 Deaths in 13 Years

In total, over the course of the last 13 years more than 8,000 NHS patients have died as a result of clinical negligence on the part of doctors, nurses and other healthcare employees like paramedics.

Experts believe that this figure may be only scratching the surface of the issue, due to the large number of families who have chosen not to launch a clinical negligence compensation claim.

Early indications for 2010-11 suggest that figures this year will be even higher than previous years; however the government claims that this is due to the fact that many claims are coming to fruition this year which involve deaths from previous years.

Eddie Jones, Partner and Head of Clinical Negligence at Manchester law firm JMW Solicitors, commented: “We need to be able to trust the doctors, nurses and paramedics employed by the NHS; in fact, the majority of them do a fantastic job in very difficult conditions.

“However, these statistics and my experience as a clinical negligence solicitor suggest that there is a significant minority of NHS staff who, whether it’s a result of inadequate training or incredibly long hours, are negligent, and that negligence costs lives.

The figures were uncovered by Conservative MP Chris Skidmore, a member of the Commons Health Select Committee. Read more at www.marketwatch.com