½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

View the related checklists about Negligence

Drafting a building contract/schedule of amendments—checklist

Drafting a building contract/schedule of amendments—checklist Once the procurement route and form of building contract has been selected (see Practice Note: Choosing the right procurement method—construction projects) the employer should consider the following matters and incorporate the appropriate drafting in the building contract particulars and schedule of amendments. This Checklist assumes that the parties are using a standard form of building contract, such as a JCT form, and that the employer is proposing the first draft including the completed contract particulars and a schedule of amendments, which amends the standard terms. This list is not exhaustive, however, and there may be other project specific matters/risks that need to be taken into account: Contractual matters • Carry out due diligence on the contractor The employer needs to carry out due diligence on the contractor at the outset to determine whether its financial position is acceptable. Confirm the contractor’s company number and name at Companies House. • Obtain consultants’ details Confirm the full details of the consultants engaged by the employer; some...

Option agreements—acting for the buyer—checklist

Option agreements—acting for the buyer—checklist Call or put option? In a 'call' option the buyer will have control in that it may call for a transfer of the property. A 'put' option gives the seller control in that it can require the buyer to take a transfer of the property and therefore the buyer should be especially vigilant in ensuring that the terms for the transfer (particularly those relating to valuation and, if appropriate, insurance) are as favourable as possible. Seller's charges If the property is already mortgaged at the date of grant of the option agreement, there is a risk that the mortgagee may overreach the option by exercising its power of sale. Therefore ensure that the mortgagee either: • joins into the agreement (this is rare in practice), or • provides written consent to the granting of the option In either case, the mortgagee should confirm that if the buyer exercises the option it will acquire the property free from the charge or, if the mortgagee...

View the related flowcharts about Negligence

Checklist—road traffic accident defences

Checklist—road traffic accident defences Defence Principle Further reading Contributory negligence Where the defendant is primarily responsible for the accident, they may allege the other party was guilty of contributing to the accident. The issues to consider are:—which parties were at fault in the accident?—in what proportion should the damages be apportioned having regard to the respective responsibilities of those at fault? Practice Note: Contributory negligence in personal injury claims Contributory negligence for failure to wear a seat belt As a general principle:25% deduction to damages—if wearing a seat belt would have prevented the injuries sustained15% deduction to damages—if wearing a seat belt would have made a considerable difference to the injuries sustained0% deduction to damages—if wearing a seat belt would not have made any difference to the injuries sustained Practice Note: Defences in road traffic accidents Contributory negligence for failure to wear a motorcycle crash helmet Leading case law has suggested:15% deduction to damages—if wearing a helmet would have resulted in less severe injuries10% deduction to damages—where the claimant...

View the related practice notes about Negligence

Relief from sanctions—illustrative decisions (from 1 January 2024)

Relief from sanctions—illustrative decisions (from 1 January 2024) This Practice Note provides a number of illustrative decisions to provide an insight into how the courts will deal with an application for relief from sanctions. It separates cases where relief from sanctions was granted from cases where relief from sanctions was refused noting the key facts of the case and details of the decision. This Practice Note provides details of relevant cases from 1 January 2024 onwards. For illustrative decisions involving relief from sanctions prior to 1 January 2024, see Practice Note: Relief from sanctions—illustrative decisions [Archived]. For guidance on when an application for relief is required and on making or opposing an application, see Practice Notes: Relief from sanctions—when is an application for relief required? and Relief from sanctions—making or opposing an application. For more detailed guidance as to the court’s approach to relief from sanctions, see Practice Note: Relief from sanctions—the courts’ approach. Relief from sanctions granted Case details and analysis Issue Decision The Occupiers of...

Remedies for connected lender liability in consumer credit

Remedies for connected lender liability in consumer credit This Practice Note examines a purchaser’s causes of action and remedies where the credit in a supplier-purchaser agreement is financed by a third party. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974) provides that in certain instances where there is a connection between the supplier of goods and services and the creditor, the borrower will be able to seek a remedy against the creditor under CCA 1974, s 75 where the supplier has made a misrepresentation or is in breach of contract. This Practice Note looks at the main requirements of section 75 and the circumstances in which it might be applied when purchasing goods or services with a credit card. Overview Under a contract for the sale or supply of goods or services as between a supplier and purchaser, the purchaser’s causes of action and remedies are well known. However, what is the position where the transaction is financed by a third-party creditor? In certain debtor-creditor-supplier (or DCS) relationships, a consumer...

View the related precedents about Negligence

Ireland—Letter of claim: newspaper report

This Precedent is drafted as a letter of claim and is designed to be sent to the editor of a newspaper that has published a defamatory report. For guidance on defamation, see Practice Notes: —Ireland—Defamation law—an overview of the Defamation Act 2009 (Ireland) —Lexology Panoramic: Defamation and Reputation Management—Ireland—Q&A guide Ask the following questions which reflect the underlying merits of a complaint: —is there clear evidence that the statements in question are false? Ensure you are in possession of all the facts prior to sending out a letter of claim —who is the subject of the defamatory material and is their business likely to be of interest to the public? The fact that a public figure has instructed lawyers in respect of allegedly defamatory comments may be as interesting to the public as the original statements and draw more attention to them. A letter of claim may be marked ‘not for publication’ but unless it contains obviously private or confidential information, little may be done to restrain its publication —has...

Letter to lenders governing appointment of creditors’ committee

Letter to lenders governing appointment of creditors’ committee To: The persons listed in Schedule 1 to this letter [insert names of Lenders] From: [insert name of solicitors for the Creditors' Committee or the name of the Chair] Date: [insert date] Appointment of Creditors' Committee We refer to the discussions at the meeting of creditors convened by [insert name of debtor company] (the Company) to discuss the proposed restructuring. 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 Definitions In this letter, unless otherwise provided: Business Day • means a day other than Saturday, Sunday and public holidays when clearing banks generally are open for business in London; Chair • means the Lender appointed to chair the Creditors' Committee under the Creditor's Committee Agreement; Commitment • means (a) any undrawn amount which a Lender has committed to make available to the Company (but excluding any undrawn uncommitted amounts); (b) the principal amount of a Lender's participation in any utilisation by the Company, in each case under the Finance Documents; Committee...

View the related q&as about Negligence

Is there any case law on an Article 75 insurer’s ability to avoid its liability to meet a judgment in circumstances where the claimant was travelling in a stolen vehicle? The claim made is not against the insurer of the vehicle the claimant was a passenger in but against another vehicle of which the insurers have Article 75 status.

Is there any case law on an Article 75 insurer’s ability to avoid its liability to meet a judgment in circumstances where the claimant was travelling in a stolen vehicle? The claim made is not against the insurer of the vehicle the claimant was a passenger in but against another vehicle of which the insurers have Article 75 status. Article 75 is an agreement between the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (the MIB) and its members under which the motor insurer will accept liability in certain cases where they would not be liable under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) (as RTA insurer). An Article 75 insurer is the insurer who is providing cover against the compulsory risks set out in RTA 1988 and will remain the Article 75 insurer notwithstanding that—(i) the insurance was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, mistake or non-disclosure of a material fact (even if a RTA 1988, s 152 declaration of entitlement to avoid liability under RTA 1988 has been obtained), and/or (ii) the cover has been...

What approach is taken by the Motor Insurer's Bureau in relation to limitation and the Uninsured Drivers' Agreement where the victim was a child at the time of the accident and is now an adult?

What approach is taken by the Motor Insurer's Bureau in relation to limitation and the Uninsured Drivers' Agreement where the victim was a child at the time of the accident and is now an adult? The most recent Uninsured Drivers' Agreement 2015 (the 2015 Agreement) came into force for accidents occurring on or after 1 August 2015. The earlier Uninsured Drivers' Agreement 1999 (the 1999 Agreement) applies to road traffic accidents which occurred between 1 October 1999 and 31 July 2015. Clause 3 of the 1999 Agreement provides that where: '(a) any act or thing is done to or by a solicitor or other person acting on behalf of a claimant, (b) any decision is made by or in respect of a solicitor or other person acting on behalf of a claimant, or (c) any sum is paid to a solicitor or other person acting on behalf of a claimant, then, whatever may be the age or other circumstances affecting the capacity of the claimant, that act, thing, decision or...

View the related News about Negligence

How to quantify accommodation claims in short life expectancy cases; still no nearer (Hill v East Kent NHS Trust)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The issue arose in an interim payment application in a clinical negligence claim as to how to value the capital cost of a property already purchased when the claimant’s life expectancy was relatively short (just over 12 years). The claimant contended that she should recover the full value of the capital cost, not least when she could otherwise have purchased a cheaper house but spent more on adaptations. The judge rejected this submission and applied a conventional Swift v Carpenter calculation, while noting that this approach may not provide full compensation to the claimant. Written by Robert Weir KC, barrister at Devereux Chambers.

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—5 June 2025

This week's edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes news of interest rate reductions for Court Funds Office accounts effective 30 May 2025 following a decrease in the Bank of England’s base rate, and a new guide for the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) introducing mandatory electronic filing and streamlined procedures for civil appeals. We consider a High Court decision where a teenage passenger’s claim for brain damage from a motorbike accident was reduced by 20% for contributory negligence for not wearing a helmet and accepting a ride from an inexperienced rider. We also bring you a workplace COVID-19 appeal that was allowed due to errors in applying the causation test during summary judgment, and a claim involving occupational injury from acoustic shock that was dismissed after the required diagnostic criteria were not met. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest and we have included a free webinar.