The Lawyer Africa Elite 2014 features an in-depth look at 46 leading independent firms’ strategies in 15 key sub-Saharan jurisdictions, as well as the views of in-house counsel from some of Africa’s largest companies... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Injuries: Award to child whose mother died shortly after her birth. Mother had undergone IVF treatment but health authorities failed to diagnose she had an eptopic pregnancy. Court told that despite "clear warning signs" staff had negligently failed to diagnose the eptopic pregnancy until the final stages of Mrs Jay's pregnancy. Mother died as result of massive blood loss after internal haemorrhage resulting from her condition. Claimed she could have been saved had her condition been diagnosed in time.
Award: £25,000 (agreed damages)
Judge: Judge Laurie
Plaintiff's counsel: Duncan Pratt
Plaintiff's solicitor: Russell Jones & Walker, WC
Malcolm v Walsh - CA 13 May 1997
Incident: Injury from fight
Appeal issue: Impact of contributory conduct
Appeal contentions: Defen-dant's appeal from order of Judge Brandt, 22 May 1996, Colchester County Court, that there should be no deduction from award of damages because of contributory conduct, fault and/or negligence by plaintiff. Action arose out of a fight between the parties after a night's drinking during which the plaintiff received a wound to his eye. The defendant was charged under s.18 of Offences Against the Person Act 1898 and was acquitted. At later civil trial Judge Brandt found for the plaintiff and awarded damages without deduction in respect of contributory negligence. The appellant contended the judge failed to give sufficient weight to evidence of defendant and witnesses that violence and misbehaviour had taken place in defendant's house and that this had been initiated and perpetrated. Judge also said to have failed to give weight to evidence that the defendant had requested the plaintiff to leave the house and the plaintiff had refused and to have decided erroneously that a short lapse of time between incident inside and outside house absolved the plaintiff of any blame or responsibility for injury.