Legal professionals

I recently read an article in a British Safety Council publication referencing HSE annual statistics noting that prosecutions for health and safety breaches were at a record low, with 2018/19 prosecutions down by 23 per cent from 2017/18 numbers, and more than a third since 2014/15. Concern was expressed that some employers were prepared to ignore health and safety laws believing that they would never be “caught”. Whilst it has always been the case that some element of employers are prepared to flout health and safety regulations for profit, or simply through recklessness, the concern is whether the proportion prepared to ignore these laws is growing or decreasing; whether the trend is going in the right direction.

A medico-legal expert’s duty is to the Court. They have a duty to be independent. They should have this duty at the forefront of their mind when carrying out their assessment(s) and when preparing their report(s). An expert’s evidence will be completely undermined if it transpires that they are saying what the party who is paying them wants to say unless that is their genuine view. It should go without saying that experts should be courteous to the Claimant and their families both during the assessment and in the report. There is an increase in Claimants seeking to record expert assessments either covertly or overtly.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-GiDOXvU-c Cambridgeshire dad Jason was on holiday in Portugal in 2012 when his life changed forever. A car hit him during an early morning bike ride, breaking his back, legs and ribs and severing his spine. Jason, from Littleport, received treatment for three weeks in Lisbon, before being moved to Cambridge. He then spent a further three months at Northern General Hospital in Sheffield. Here specialists gave him the devastating news that he would never walk again. Jason and his family contacted Irwin Mitchell’s specialist serious injury solicitors about making a claim to help fund his ongoing care needs.

A case manager’s role in a seriously injured person recovery cannot be understated, write David Withers, partner at Irwin Mitchell.

Rehabilitation on catastrophic injury cases should work for both claimants and defendants, subject of course to liability attaching to the defendant or being likely to attach. At the outset of a serious injury case, claimants generally have two short-term priorities:

• Alleviate financial hardship
• Maximise their recovery through effective rehabilitation.

When Sarah’s mother was in labour, the hospital staff failed to pick up on what should have been worrying signals coming from the CTG monitor. After experiencing lack of oxygen at birth, Sarah* was diagnosed with mild athetoid cerebral palsy as a baby. By age five she had vision problems and required occasional use of a wheelchair. She could finger feed, although it was somewhat clumsy and her parents had to help her at mealtimes. Liquids also had to be thickened to make drinking easier. Her manual dexterity was poor and she was susceptible to chest infections. The hospital Trust denied liability for Sarah’s injury and so a protracted liability trial followed.

The Court of Protection (CoP) makes decisions on financial and welfare matters for people lacking mental capacity. It was created under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and has a range of responsibilities, including deciding whether an individual has mental capacity, and appointing deputies to make decisions for people who lack it. Deputies may be a friend or relative of the individual, or a professional such as a solicitor or accountant appointed by the court. The CoP can significantly influence the work of professionals with clients with brain injuries and neurological conditions.

If an individual suffers an injury on the road through the negligence of a driver, they will recover compensation.

This is because of the provisions within Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

Arguably the biggest difference has been felt by people who would otherwise find talking with others hugely challenging; including those with certain disabilities and/or social difficulties. But the internet can be a dark place with illegal material readily accessible. Internet abuse is common place and can take many forms including bullying, sexual grooming and personal identity theft. In the recently reported case of Re A (Capacity: Social Media and Internet Use: Best Interests) [2019] EWCOP2), the Court of Protection sets out the information P must be able to understand, retain, use and weigh up to have capacity to access the internet and social media safely.

When the rape of a Manchester woman with learning difficulties came to trial in 2012, everything hinged on her memories of the ordeal. In the cold light of the courtroom, under intense scrutiny from the defence barrister, her muddled mind began letting her down. Timelines became skewed, details foggy and responses inconsistent. Yet somewhere inside [...]