22nd September, 2023

No busman's holiday for Elizabeth Murray and Leanne Jones as they secure victory for their clients in a 2 day EL/PL case

Elizabeth Murray and Leanne Jones secured success for their respective clients in this 2 day Employers Liability/Occupiers Liability trial in which the Second Defendant was ordered to pay out almost £50,000.

Elizabeth represented the Claimant who had been injured during the course of her employment with the Second Defendant as a "bus shunter". The Claimant originally pursued a claim against the First Defendant, as owner/occupier of the premises, and the Second Defendant, as her employer.  The Second Defendant in turn brought a CPR 20.6 claim for contribution/indemnity against the First Defendant on the basis that, as the employer, it had no control over the workplace, premises, equipment, devices and systems.

By the date of trial the Claimant pursued only her claim against the Second Defendant, as her employer.

The Second Defendant maintained its claim for contribution/indemnity and Leanne Jones defended the First Defendant on that basis.

The trial was heard over the course of two days. On entering judgment for the Claimant, Recorder Adkinson held that any Risk Assessments and Method Statements prepared by the Second Defendant were "a box ticking exercise rather than a genuine attempt to assess the risk to the Claimant." Dismissing the indemnity/contribution claim the Recorder held that "nothing he heard in evidence was suggestive of any blame on the part of the First Defendant. There was nothing about the set-up of the bus washing facilities which lays any blame with them."

Elizabeth secured judgment for the Claimant in the sum of £14,631.98, together with costs of £25,135.89.

Leanne had the indemnity/contribution claim against her client dismissed and the Second Defendant was ordered to pay the costs of and associated with that claim alone in the sum of £8750

Elizabeth Murray was instructed by Brayfords Solicitors.

Leanne Jones was instructed by Kennedys Law.

Latest News...

The judgment of the Supreme Court in TUI v Griffiths regarding 'uncontroverted' expert evidence: nuclear bomb or damp squib?

29th November, 2023
William Hamilton and Beth Caunce review this Supreme Court decision which concerns the correct approach to "uncontroverted" expert evidence, here in the context of a travel sickness claim, but with broader ramifications regarding the procedural fairness of refraining from cross-examining an expert or relying on one’s own expert and waiting instead to criticise that expert’s opinion in closing submissions.

"Don't discuss the case with anyone until your evidence has finished" (we really mean it!)

28th November, 2023
Rachael Levene and Louise Quigley successfully got a multi-day claim of race discrimination struck out after the Claimant failed to heed the warning of not discussing the case until her evidence was complete.

Pupillage Gateway, open to view adverts

27th November, 2023
Today we launch our adverts for pupillage in the Criminal, Family, Employment and Personal Injury teams.