Unit 1: Road Traffic Accidents - prep and workshop tasks PDF

Preview

Summary

Personal Injury and Clinical NegligenceUnit 1: Road Traffic AccidentsPrep Task:a)Case Analysis grid for RTAs:DUTY – owed by who to whom One road user to another, e. to drive to the standard of an ordinary competent driverNettleship v WestonBREACH How did the D fail to meet the standard in this case?...

Description

Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Unit 1: Road Traffic Accidents Prep Task: a) Case Analysis grid for RTAs: DUTY – owed by who to whom

BREACH CAUSATION OF DAMAGE

REMOTENESS LOSS DEFENCES?

One road user to another, e.g. to drive to the standard of an ordinary competent driver How did the D fail to meet the standard in this case? Did the wrongful act/omission cause the injury and other losses? Any intervening act? Were the losses reasonably foreseeable? What were the losses? Contributory negligence? Third parties?

Nettleship v Weston

The ‘but for’ test: Barnett v Chelsea

The Wagon Mound

s1(1) Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES ? Duty of Care All road users (D + S), Standard of ordinary competent driver (Nettleship v Weston). Breach Dangerous driving Careless driving (s3 RTA) Highway code: 86 – observe/be seen Highway code: 146 – be careful at junctions Highway code: 170 – look for cyclists Causation ‘But for’ pulling out, the collision would not have happened. Remoteness N/A Loss Injuries, bike, other items damages, job opportunities, earnings, etc… Defences

Strengths/Weaknesses Strengths:

-

She was braking before car manoeuvred, on approach Driving within speed limit She had right of way and car cut across her path She was checking the entrance when she was approaching She was only 20m away from car when it cut across her Weaknesses: The only evidence we have so far is Kate: need other side, police report, hospital documents etc… We don’t know what the speed limit was on that straight of the road, was on approach to a roundabout We don’t know condition of her bike We don’t know condition of the road, weather conditions etc…

-

Were the parties insured? What was the speed limit? Whose right of way was it? Police accident officer reports, on the road, light conditions etc… Wearing a leatherjacket? Visibility? Any witnesses that saw the accident? (should find this out from police accident report) Photographs Any CCTV from the nearby garage? Any defect in the bike that could have contributed? Mechanical engineers report

-

b)

c) CFA (win) KM pays usual hourly rate plus “success fee” i.e. % increase on normal hourly rates. Maximum 100%. - Limit = 25% of damages for PSLA and past monetary losses - Although D will pay C’s reasonable costs, they will NOT have to pay success fee – KM will have to pay that CFA (lose) -

-

Other side’s costs – None (QUOCS) Own solicitor’s costs – No (or less) fee May be disbursements (could cover by AEI but will have to pay premium) DBA (win)

KM pays fee (inc counsel’s fee & VAT) = % of damages - Limit = 25% of damages for PSLA and past monetary losses - Although D will have to pay C’s reasonable costs, they may be less than the % payable under DBA. If so, KM will pay shortfall - NB Indemnity principle – D will not have to pay any more than C is obliged to pay his solicitor DBA (lose) -

-

Other side’s costs – None (QUOCS) Own solicitor’s costs – No fee May be disbursements (could cover by AEI but will have to pay premium)? Remember … powerpoint Possible Conduct Q: Principle 7 act in the best interest of the client Para 8.7 – how to advise on costs

-

Best possible information about price At start and throughout likely overall costs Inc para 8.6 giving information in a way that the client can understand

Workshop Task 1 a) Helps: - Car (V2) had worn tyres – poor maintenance of his vehicle - Officer’s statement: V2 should have pulled out faster and with more care - Good visibility and bright – should have seen Claimant - Speed limit was 60mph, so she was driving within limit - Was a witness (but he didn’t really say anything that helped) - He’s insured and we have his insurance details so there can be a claim Hinders: -

In the police report, she said she couldn’t remember anything and then gave a very detailed written report She fell before the impact with the car – can see this in witness statement – suggests that she lost control of the bike Police report states that he may not have been able to see her because of a bend in the road Even though it was a 60mph road, was she driving at an appropriate speed? Approaching a roundabout and damp conditions

b) Seems to be a fairly solid case. Should chase some things up and make further enquires before beginning proceedings, e.g. investigate possible false claim due to the discrepancies in her statements… but ultimately, firm would likely be willing to take the case on. The higher the chance of winning, and more often you win, the higher the success fee you can claim and the higher the DBA. Task 2 a) >£25K = Personal Injury pre-action protocol - further evidential enquiries - early notification and settlement - client rehabilitation - Letter of Claim, towards settlement or trial

b)...