Personal Injury Lawsuit

Of all the crises that managers must deal with in the workplace, accidents and medical emergencies are by far the most common. While many of these are unavoidable, a significant number result because of dangerous procedures and worker error. All it takes for an employer to reduce the number of accidents at work, is to use a common sense approach to prevent accidents. Research often suggests that among the most significant factors in injuries are employee errors, procedural inefficiencies and a lack of appropriate training.

Read more

The recent controversy about Cherie Blair using a no win no fee firm for her libel case in the courts has highlighted what is perceived as the latest abuse of the system which was created to provide access to justice ten years ago.  This article aims to highlight the relationship between no win no fee arrangements (otherwise known as conditional fee agreements) and defamation claims.

The main complaint about Cherie Blair using a conditional fee agreement in her specific case is that, as a relatively wealthy individual, she is in effect abusing the CFA system in order to force the magazine or newspaper into settling claims. Defamation/libel by its nature has always had the reputation of a tort that has been left to claimants who are wealthy as the cases often run into millions. The introduction of ‘no win, no fee’ agreements, or conditional fee agreements (CFAs), under the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 enabled those who would otherwise be unable to fund the substantial costs involved in defamation claims to bring an action. In cases where a wealthy individual (especially a celebrity) takes a media defendant to court, these media defendants find themselves paying up to settle the claim rather than losing what could be a very large amount at trial. The criticism is that they are fenced into paying out because of this even when the claim against them may be frivolous.

Defamation essentially takes places where a false statement is made about a person (or a company) that damages their reputation. The statement can be either in a permanent form (libel) or a transient form (slander). A company also has a reputation and contrary to popular belief can also be defamed.

Another problem that often comes to fruition in defamation cases is the costs subsequent to proceedings. Under a CFA, lawyers are paid nothing if they lose, but are allowed to claim a ’success fee’ in addition to their basic fee if they win because of the risk incurred in taking the claim. The level of the success fee is the main concern, with defamation lawyers more often than not claiming the full 100% uplift, which doubles their usual fees. If a claimant obtains ‘after the event’ insurance (ie, against the cost of losing and having to pay the other side’s costs), an unsuccessful defendant will also have to pay a substantial insurance premium on top of the success fee.

The problem that is currently plaguing defamation cases of late is that of

celebrities using the CFA system to prevent the media from publishing anything controversial or critical about them, thus stifling freedom of expression. Moreover, a small publisher could well find itself out of business if it loses a CFA-funded case.

Read more

Read more

Medical Malpractice New York: You Have a Good Case, Do You?
By: Paul Justice | 12/07/2008 | Personal Injury
When it comes to private matters involving medical malpractice it can be very devastating especially if someone acted negligent.

Read more

It was his first week on his new job but that was his conclusion. The young man was learning all about how to read meters for the local power company. He was with an older man that was showing him the ropes and teaching him the route before he was to be sent out alone. Little did he know that his mentor had a surprise for him that day.

Read more

What do you do? Where do you turn? Do you even realize you could be the victim of a defective product?

Read more

New laws introduced in May 2008 is said to have broaden the scope within which compensation claims can be made. The law banned some 31 practices and widened the rules under which consumers can seek compensation; most importantly it outlaws and makes illegal information which if given deceives the average consumer into making a transaction they wouldn’t have taken.

Read more

Five solicitors including one personal injury solicitor are being promoted to associate status in recognition of their specialist skills and contribution to the rapid growth of Essex law firm Birkett Long. The firm has announced a series of promotions, alongside the adoption of a new corporate identity to mark its conversion to Limited Liability Partnership status from June 1.

The individuals promoted include Keith Songhurst, a solicitor specialising in construction law and litigation, who is a member of the Property Litigation Association and focuses on property disputes, is to become a partner. Emma Brunning, who works in family law, dealing with divorce, separation, matrimonial finances and contact with children, and is accredited by Resolution as a specialist family lawyer. Ben Twitchen, trained in Collaborative Law, a non-adversarial alternative to the divorce court, and he also advises in motoring prosecutions and health and safety cases. He is a member of the Family Law panel of experts.

Miranda Leate, an immigration law specialist: her work includes work permit and European Association Agreement applications; she is an experienced advocate in the immigration and civil courts and has conducted cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Finally Nadina Edmondson, who has 16 years’ experience of personal injury cases behind her and is a member of the Law Society’s Personal Injury Panel and the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers.

Birkett Long has 18 partners and more than 150 staff across offices in Chelmsford and Colchester.

Managing partner Philip George said: “The LLP status gives the firm a modern structure from which we can continue to attract quality staff and clients.

“Any of the larger professional partnerships are choosing the corporate vehicle of LLP and we see it as integral to meeting our ambitious plans for growth. We are delighted to launch our new identity at the same time in order to support our plans and give us a robust platform from which to develop our brand values.”

The changes and promotions have been welcomed by all those involved and included, as the conversion to Limited Liability Partnership status will mean more work for everyone. In particular those with greater responsibility, namely Songhurst, Brunning, Twitchen, Leate and Edmondson whose tasks include management and supervision.

Birkett Long law firm is a law firm which supplies legal advice and services nationwide, based in Essex. It advises both businesses and individual clients, claiming ‘Our reputation is for providing high quality, cost effective and practical solutions, locally, nationally and internationally.’

The firm is pursuing a steady expansion plan and the firm is now one of the largest in the area, offering a wide range of specialist legal services, complemented by a team of independent financial advisers.  On their website it is claimed that ‘client care is at the top of our priority list.  We will do everything within our power to make the legal processes straightforward and problem free.’

Regarding the new Limited Liability Partnership status they have reported: ‘The partnership of Birkett Long became a Limited Liability Partnership on 1 June 2008. The Partners took the decision to change the legal make-up of the firm to give it a modern structure so we can continue to attract quality staff and clients to the firm. Many professional partnerships have taken this step in the past few years and we believe that this structure provides us with the right corporate vehicle to meet our ambitious plans for growth and development. You will notice our corporate identity has also been redesigned to coincide with our move to LLP status. These changes will not affect our service to clients and business partners. If anyone has any questions please contact our Managing Partner, Philip George.’

Read more

Being involved in an accident is always upsetting and stressful but if that accident was not your fault then it is possible to make a compensation claim. Living in the UK means that any claim you make should cost nothing as the legal fees will be covered by the third party who caused the accident.

Read more

Amendments India’s Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have meant that there will be more compensation for those making accident claims, new reports have shown. According to the latest official statistics from the Indian government, over 100,000 people were killed in road accidents in India in 2006 and nearly half a million were injured. That means one accident per minute and a fatal one every five minutes.

The plan for amendments to the Motor vehicles Act form part of a national effort to control accidents, due to be introduced in the coming session of parliament. They include suspending the licence of a drunk driver on the spot for up to three months. There were around 460,000 road accidents in the country in 2006, Minister of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways T.R. Baalu stated, killing 105,749 people and injuring nearly 500,000. At 2000 prices, the losses due to road accidents were Rs.550 billion (nearly $14 billion) a year, which amounted to 3% of India’s GDP, Baalu told the consultative committee of MPs attached to his ministry.

With the amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, “the penalties for various traffic offences are proposed to be enhanced substantially to make it more deterrent”, Baalu said.

“We have proposed that the authorised enforcement authorities may suspend on the spot the driving licence of a drunken driver for a period up to three months and we are also proposing to introduce civil liabilities of a driver by providing penalty up to Rs.5,000 if one drives a motor vehicle in a rash or negligent manner, causing injury to a person or damage to property.”

Another amendment proposes to raise the interim compensation to accident victims to Rs.100,000 in case of death or permanent total disablement and to Rs.50,000 in case of permanent partial disablement, the minister said. The claimants will be paid within three months from the date of filing the application in the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) or civil court.

“We are also providing that the MACT or civil court shall try to finally dispose off the claim for compensation within a period of two years from the date of its filing,” added Baalu.

The ministry is designing new model inspection and maintenance centres to be set up by state governments for inspection of motor vehicle, with the centre said to be giving financial assistance to set them up. The government will also soon approve the Sundar Committee’s proposal to earmark at least one percent of the money generated from the cess on diesel and petrol for a road safety fund, Baalu said, adding “the committee’s proposal for creation of an apex body, the National Road Safety & Traffic Management Board, is also being processed at the highest level.”

The committee to look into the matter of promotion of road safety in educational institutions through Road Safety Clubs has given its report and a scheme costing Rs.1.2 billion during the 11th plan (2007-2012) has been formulated and sent to the Planning Commission for approval.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals have been constituted by different State Governments, for the speedy disposal of third party claims, in accordance with Section 110 of the M V Act 1939. Such tribunals are presided over by a person of the rank of a District Judge or High Court Judge. Only a nominal fee has to be paid for instituting a case and the court fee is not based on the value of the suit.  Thus, poor third party claimants are not prevented from making proper claims. All third party claims for personal injury and property damage have to be filed with the tribunals.

Read more