• William Thorpe appeared for the claimant in an application by the defendant for summary judgment in the High Court before Deputy Master Toogood KC. The basis of the defendant’s application was that the claim (a professional negligence claim against a firm of solicitors who mishandled a spinal injury claim with a pleaded value in excess of £400,000) was an impermissible collateral attack on the court’s decisions in the underlying claim and offended the doctrine of res judicata. After a hearing that lasted half a day, the defendant’s application was dismissed. The claim continues.

  • Michael Krebs has written an article that has been published in The Liverpool Law Magazine, June 23 on Japanese Knotweed, titled “Japanese Knotweed…Plant or Plague”.  Click here to read.

  • Michael Krebs is speaking at a Liverpool Law Society online training course on 18th October 23 at 11:00 on the subject “Introduction to Japanese Knotweed claims”. Click here for further details.

  • Michael Krebs has written an article that has been published in The Law Gazette on housing disrepair, titled “The eternal internal danger”.  Click here to read.

  • David Pilling successfully settled a clinical negligence and Fatal Accidents Act claim for £1.13 million acting as sole junior Counsel at the conclusion of a recent JSM. The main quantum issues included the extent of the services dependency given the deceased worked full-time and the extent to which the surviving partner’s loss of income in looking after their three children should be reflected in that dependency calculation.Mr Pilling regularly acts as sole junior Counsel in such cases.

  • We are pleased to announce that Mr Andrew Foden successfully represented Mr Stephen Eddies in his claim against Stockport NHS Foundation Trust, which was featured in a substantive piece, on Channel 4 News on the 26th July 2021, in a report prepared by Victoria Macdonald: Health and Social Care Editor for Channel 4 News.

To access a copy of the Press Release please click here.

  • As part of David Pilling’s regular speaking work for MBL Seminars he has recently pre-recorded two webinars for them which are now available to download, one on the perennial issue of CPR 3.9 relief from sanctions and the second a full introductory guide to cosmetic surgery clinical negligence claims. They can be downloaded here:Relief from Sanctions – Denton & Beyond for Litigators – Webinar (mblseminars.com)Cosmetic Surgery Claims – An Introductory Guide – Webinar (mblseminars.com)In addition, David is also presenting a Learn Live event for MBL Seminars on 16th July 2021 entitled “Clinical Negligence Update – the Developing Themes and Trends” which can also be booked via the MBL website:Clinical Negligence Update – The Developing Themes & Trends – Learn Live (mblseminars.com)This session will include discussion and analysis of the Supreme Court’s very recent decision in Khan v Meadows.Generally, David is happy to provide these talks (and talks on other topics relating to his principal areas of practice, being clinical negligence, serious personal injury and costs) to instructing solicitors or other interested parties on request, either in person or remotely. Please get in touch with Andrew or Nathan to discuss.

  • Luke Menary from Liverpool Civil Law Chambers recently represented the Applicant in a contested application for an urgent interim injunction before His Honour Judge Cadwallader, resident Chancery Judge in the County Court at Liverpool.The case concerned a proposed compulsory transfer of the Applicant’s entire ‘A Shareholding’ in the Respondent company, which was due to take place (with or without the Applicant’s consent) the very next day.  A purchaser of the A Shareholding had been identified, however the Applicant did not wish for her shareholding to be transferred; she wished to remain an ‘A Shareholder’, of which she was the only one.  The transfer was, however, out of her hands (according to the Respondent).Urgent Part 8 proceedings were issued for a declaration as to the invalidity of the removal of the Applicant as a director of the Respondent and the service of the compulsory transfer, along with an urgent application for the interim injunction.  The main issue to be determined at the hearing of the interim injunction was the first limb of the test set out in the seminal case of American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396 – was there a serious issue to be tried?Extensive submissions were made at the hearing concerning the alleged invalidity of the Respondent’s (including the remaining director and shareholders) actions, and the interplay between the purported resolutions, relevant shareholders agreement and Articles of Association.  Following submissions, an undertaking from the Respondent not to make any disposition of the Applicant’s shares was accepted by HHJ Cadwallader, along with a cross-undertaking from the Applicant in respect of any damages suffered.  For now, the Applicant remains in possession of her A Shares.The matter has been re-listed for a final hearing.Luke Menary was instructed to draft the urgent Part 8 proceedings and interim injunction application in addition to representing the Applicant at the hearing.

Other News

> For some feedback for chambers, please click here.