Source: http://lawsaccidentclaims.tumblr.com/
Timestamp: 2013-05-23 15:03:34
Document Index: 652047147

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36', 'art 36']

Laws Accident Claims
Mother Of Baby Girl Who Died 6 Days After Birth Settles Her Claim For Medical Negligence
Suzzanne Dunne claimed damages for negligence, breach of duty of care and breach of agreement against the National Maternity Hospital, following the death of her baby girl 6 deaths after her birth.
It was claimed that negligence by the hospital caused baby Alena to suffer severe blood loss due to a rupture of the placenta resulting in further injury to the baby.Amplify’d from www.herald.ieMum 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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1ixxx
Tagged: baby dies at birth due to hospital negligence, clinical negligence claim, damages for negligence during birth, medical negligence compensation claim, national maternity hospital, personal injury compensation claim, .
Legal Aid Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Bill Got Clobbered By The House of Lords
The Legal Aid Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Bill was described by the House of Lords as a ‘huge assault on access to justice’ that ‘attacked the rights of the sick, vulnerable, bereaved and injured, and will ‘bring shame on our legal system’, undermines the rule of law and result in a ‘flood of litigants in person’.
It was noteworthy that the Government’s proposed reforms to civil litigation funding, which is being introduced at lightning speed and with scant consideration to the warnings of many organisations across the board of the injustice that will result, was ill-received by the House of Lords this week that voted overwhelmingly against many aspects of the proposed law changes.
You can read the full story in the Law Society Gazzette simply follow the link attached.Amplify’d from www.lawgazette.co.uk
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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1ixuo
Tagged: civil litigation funding reforms, compensation claims and funding, funding of accident compensation claims, funding of personal injury accident claims, funding personal injury claim, Legal Aid Sentencing &amp; Punishment of Offenders Bill, .
Ex-policeman Claims Injury Compensation As A Passenger In A Patrol Car Accident 34 year old ex-policewoman is claiming compensation for physical injury and psychological injury suffered in a car accident whilst a passenger in a police patrol car.
In 2009, Miss Lyons was badly injured in a car accident that left her traumatised and suffering from mental health problems that forced her to retire from the police force.
The claim against the police force is not being disputed by the police force but quantum of damages is still an issue in dispute. It is being claimed by the police force that Miss Lyons’s was already vulnerable to mental health issues prior to the crush and are therefore denying the value of Ms Lyon’s compensation claim.
You can read the full story here…Amplify’d from www.belfasttelegraph.co.ukEx-policewoman’s battle for payout after accident
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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1issj
1 note Tagged: car accident compensation claim, ex-policewoman, passenger in car accident compensation claim, passenger injury compensation claim, personal injury claim by policewoman, road traffic accident claim, .
Children Hardest Hit By Proposed Withdrawal of Legal Aid For Medical Negligence Claims
Charon QC wrote a blog reviewing the proposed cut of legal aid in medical negligence claim, excerpts of which I have attached for your ease and should you wish to read the full story simply follow the link back to the original blog post.
If you’ve been following the debate on the proposed withdrawal of legal aid for medical negligence claims you’ll know that it’s a bit of a hot potato. It is not just lawyers that have been arguing against the proposed legal aid cuts and lobbying Government, but the calls for the Government to reconsider comes from even the most unlikely sources - Lord Justice Jackson the architect of the transformational reforms that is currently hitting civil litigation funding, and even bodies representing NHS Trusts in medical negligence litigation is in favour of retaining legal aid for medical negligence.
The unfortunate mistake that the Government is making is that the legal aid cuts will hit those most vulnerable and who are least financially equipped to pursue a medical negligence claim without financial assistance
One group in particular that will be hit hardest are children who have suffered birth defects as a result of medical negligence during birth. These cases tend to be the most complex because they require detailed forensic consideration by specialist medical experts to ascertain the root cause of the birth defects. These cases have significant upfront costs that will no longer be available with the withdrawal of legal aid and so the question becomes how will this funding gap be filled? If this funding gap isn’t filled, significant injustice will occur because legal redress for these cases will only be available to those that can afford it and that will be tragic.Amplify’d from charonqc.wordpress.comWill 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 SecretaryReferring 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:
Response to MOJ Consultation on the Reform of Legal AidRead more at charonqc.wordpress.com See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1isp8
10 notes Tagged: birth defect medical negligence claim, clinical negligence claims, lawyers, medical negligence compensation claims, personal injury solicitors, removal of legal aid for medical negligence, .
Legal Difficulties In Work Accident Compensation Claims
There are many legal challenges to overcome when pursuing a accident claim for a work injury.
This articles looks at some of the many issues that a work accident solicitors considers when advising a potential claimant of a work accident. For example, did the accident “during the course of employment”? Was the defective equipment responsible for the accident owned or in the “control” of the employer.? If not, did the employer give consent to the use of the defective equipment?
This a many other issues are pertinent issues in claims for compensation for work accidents. You can read the full article here =>Amplify’d from ezinearticles.comWork Accident Injury Claims Due to Defective Work EquipmentAn 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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1iney
Tagged: accident due to defective work equipment, defective work equipment, personal injury at work, work accident claim, work equipment regulations, .
Government Report Suggests Ban On Personal Injury Referrals Will Hurt Claimants
The controversial decision to ban personal injury referral fees has been revealed to be potentially damaging for Claimants by an impact assessment by the Government.
The Ministry of Justice has admitted that “overall claimants might lose out”. The biggest concern expressed by many lawyers is that the Government has been rushing this through without proper consideration to concerns raised and how it will work in practice.
You can pick up the full story here ->Amplify’d from www.lawgazette.co.uk
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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1ind6
Tagged: accident compensation claims, Personal injury claimants, personal injury claims, referral fee ban, .
The Importance of Making Settlement Offers In Personal Injury Claims
If you have been involved in an accident and are seeking to negotiate on your own behalf a settlement of your claim for personal injury with the fault driver’s insurers, its important that any offer that you make is backed up in writing and compliant with Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The reason is because Part 36 offers have a number of benefits to you and put the insurer on notice that if they don’t accept your offer and you later get an award of damages by the court equal to or in excess of your offer, you will be entitled to higher interest and possibly recovery of some of your costs.
Check out the article for further details.Amplify’d from ezinearticles.comThe Importance For Accident Victims In Making Early Part 36 Offers To Settle Personal Injury ClaimsThere 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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1iiad
Tagged: accident injury compensation claim, car accident compensation claim, medical negligence compensation claim, part 36 CPR and accident compensation settlement, personal injury compensation claim, road traffic accident compensation claim, uk civil procedure rules, work accident compensation claim, .
Inquest Into The Tragic Death of Paula Jurek In A Cycling Accident on “death mile” Delayed
Cyclist have branded the stretch of road at Camden Road and St Pancras Way as “Death Mile” where the tragic death of cyclist Paula Jurek occurred in April of this year. Her death triggered the protect ride by over 500 cyclist in London last Saturday to draw attention to the unacceptable dangers of riding in certain accident blackspots in and around London.
The event received widespread exposure with pedestrians and drivers alike giving applaud to the efforts of the protesters.Amplify’d from www.camdennewjournal.comCyclist 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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1ii9q
Tagged: bicyle accident death inquest, cyclist accident camden town, cyclist RTA fatality, paula jurek inquest, road traffic accident camden london, .
Costume Designer Claims Work Accident Compensation For Fall Down Staircase
The telegraph reported today on the accident claim by a costumer designer who fell down a flight of stairs at work. The accident occurred while Sunwoo Chun, a costume designer, who was doing voluntary work at the National Film and Television School at Beaconsfield Studios, on a graduation film called Motel 66.
Ms Chun was apparently making some adjustments at the top of the stairs at the studio when she fell backwards causing serious fracture injuries to her spine that has left her paralysed from the chest down.
An employer has health and safety obligations pursuant to regulation 12(5) of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, which stipulates that in relation to staircases:
“Suitable and sufficient handrails and, if appropriate, guards shall be provided on all traffic routes which are staircases except in circumstances in which a handrail can not be provided without obstructing the traffic route.”
If Ms Chun’s claim is successful she will be entitled to claim compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenity, loss of future income, medical costs of treatment and the ongoing care and treatment that she will now need for the rest of her life.Amplify’d from www.telegraph.co.ukCostume 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 See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1i9uj
1 note Tagged: costume, designer, national film, staircase, staircase accident at work claim, work accident compensation claim, work injury claim, .
8000 Deaths Caused By Medical Negligence Over 13 Years Just “Cratching the Surface”!
Figures uncovered by Conservative MP Chris Skidmore, a member of the Commons Health Select Committee reveal how NHS clinical negligence has led to a record number of claims involving deaths being made against the health service.
The figures reveal that medical negligence claims in 2010-2011 will be even higher than last year with total medical negligence claims for death over 13 years to be a staggering 8000. Experts believe that this figure may only be scratching the surface as it the numbers don’t include families that don’t launch a claim.
Get the full story ……Amplify’d from www.marketwatch.comNHS Clinical Negligence Caused 8,000 Deaths in 13 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.
Read more at www.marketwatch.com See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1i9t2
3 notes Tagged: 000, clinical negligence compensation claim, hospital negligence claims, medical errors causing injury or death, medical negligence compensation claim, nhs clinical negligence caused, .