Items starting with A

Procedure roll: plea to relevancy by first defenders: the pursuer brought an action for damages for negligence of the first and second defenders in respect of treatment she was given as a result of the findings of a urine sample. The pursuer attended at the first defenders complaining of sickness. ......

This appeal by the Law Society of Scotland under section 21 of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007 against a decision by the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, concerned whether a complaint made against Mr Alastair Dean, solicitor, of the Alastair Dean Law Practice Ltd was ......

A private company providing interpreter services on behalf of the State appealed a third party costs order for causing a sentencing hearing to be adjourned on the ground that the judge erred in finding serious misconduct, raising the issue as to the circumstances in which a court may exercise its p......

The first applicant instructed a barrister on a direct access basis in the defence of a defamation claim. Dissatisfied with the services he disinstructed the barrister and instructed a solicitors firm to act who instructed another barrister. The applicant lodged a complaint about his first barriste......

Statistical Evidence in relation to life expectancy. A judge had not erred in refusing to allow expert statistical evidence as to life expectancy to be adduced in a personal injury action as the appropriate course was for the matter to be addressed by the clinical experts with the expert evidence......

Liability of professional funder: A professional funder, who had financed part of a claimant's costs of litigation in a manner which facilitated access to justice and which was not otherwise objectionable, should be potentially liable for the costs of the opposing party only to the extent of the fu......

A success fee of 100% was unreasonable where judgement had already been entered as the main risks to the litigation had gone. Non-recovery of charges would only have arisen if the C rejected a Part 36 offer and subsequently failed to beat that offer. The Master had originally decided that as the C ......

Consideration of Local Authority's Duty Of Care To Claimant Who Had Crossed Road From Its Land And A Gap In The Fence:-HHJ Simon Wood (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) dismissed the Claimant's claim for damages pursuant to the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 and in negligence. The Claimant, who ......

Trial Judge should have tested her Process of Reasoning against the Evidence:The Court of Appeal so held in allowing an appeal against judgment in favour of a train driver under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The trial judge had found that sloping seats in the Defendant's......

The court summarized the principles for determining whether a lender had suffered any measurable loss following the entry into a transaction as a result of the alleged negligence of a third party.   See also this update from HULT Private Capital. ......

On 27th September 2007, the pursuer's TVR Tuscan Mark 1 fibre-glass motor vehicle was parked and unattended, when the defender's insured collided with it while attempting to reverse park. The collision caused damage to the pursuer's vehicle, specifically its paint and bodywork. At the time of the a......

Self-Defence in Assault Claims must be based on an Honest and Reasonable Belief:The House of Lords held that, in order for a defendant to establish self-defence in response to a claim in tort for assault and battery, they must not only show that they honestly believed that they were in imminent dan......

The Pursuer/Appellant appealed against an award of solatium of £1,500 for neck and back injuries. It was argued that the Sheriff's assessment of solatium had not been based on careful analysis of all the relevant facts on the basis that his Note referred to the Pursuer's injuries having resolv......

A claim against the party's former legal representatives in respect of an earlier professional negligence action was dismissed on a summary basis. Earlier attempts to appeal the original decision out of time had failed because they were out of time. The Claimants alleged that their barristers were ......

Judgment upheld in respect of a finding that each party was equally responsible where car straddled notional white line and motorcycle had been speeding. ......

In a case where a pedestrian had sustained injuries after stepping on an unstable manhole cover located in a shopping street, the highway authority had failed to show by its system of purely visual inspections that it had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secur......

Application for an extension to comply with a disclosure order and cross-application to vary an order for costs of disclosure applications to an indemnity basis. Held: Where applications are applied for in time and involve no significant fresh prejudice to the other parties, considerations of co......

An appeal on the grounds of causation was made following a case where the claimant failed to prove that the solicitor's negligence in providing appropriate planning advice had actually caused any loss. On appeal, an application to produce fresh evidence was dismissed as it was said that it woul......

In a family action, the Defender withheld details of her current address. At proof, the Pursuer objected to the non disclosure. When the action was raised, the Defender had admitted the address in the instance in her defences. She later changed her address, but did not provided details of her up to......

Here a motion was made on behalf of eleven individuals who claimed to have been diagnosed with bilateral pleural plaques caused by negligent exposure to asbestos and who had actions for loss, injury and damage in process or in immediate contemplation for leave to enter the process in terms of Rule ......

MOTOR INSURER NOT LIABLE FOR SEXUAL ASSAULTS COMMITTED BY THEIR INSURED TAXI DRIVER The Claimants (C) were victims of sexual offences committed by the First Defendant (D1), who was a taxi driver. The Second Defendant (D2) was his insurer. C claimed that D2 was liable for injuries they sustaine......