News & Events
News & Events
Nathan Tavares QC explores the potential for future litigation stemming from a rare form of cancer caused by breast augmentation surgery. Nathan Tavares QC of our Clinical Negligence Team has written an article on one of the latest medical issues surrounding breast augmentation surgery and the resulting litigation that may follow from Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma. Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma Controversy rarely leaves the sphere of breast surgery. The consequences of the PIP scandal, where implants had been fraudulently manufactured with unapproved silicone gel, have been far reaching. The report of the independent inquiry into the actions of rogue breast surgeon Ian Paterson was recently published and the litigation surrounding his misdemeanours and the…
Insights 7 May, 2020
What notice pay should employers pay to employees on furlough if the employee has agreed to accept 80% of pay during furlough? Daniel Barnett clarifies. Salary payments made by the employer during furlough can still be reclaimed from HMRC (subject to the limits of the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme), despite the employee working out notice. An unresolved issue is: if employees have agreed to accept 80% of their salary while on furlough, is their notice pay also paid at 80%, or does it revert by operation of law to 100%? Remarkably little has been written on this, in part because such a simple question entails an extremely complex analysis, and in part because even with that analysis, the answer remains…
Insights 4 May, 2020
Will Young discusses the impact of important new guidance provided recently by the Court of Appeal, in Blanche v EasyJet [2019] EWCA Civ 69. The guidance centres on circumstances in which airlines will be able to avoid paying compensation to passengers whose flights have been delayed as a result of air traffic control decisions. The Claimant was booked onto a flight travelling from Brussels to London Gatwick on 10 October 2014, however the flight was delayed by five hours and 42 minutes in total. Delays had been caused by a series of thunderstorms that afternoon with the result that Air Traffic Control (“ATC”) at Gatwick had suspended all eastbound flights. The aircraft, which had been scheduled to fly from London to Brussels…
Insights 19 Feb, 2019
David E Grant, Outer Temple Chambers, comments on practical implications for financial advisors and practitioners in light of Alistair Rae Burns vs FCA. Background Mr Burns, the owner of Rae Burns, a financial adviser company, advised clients on transferring occupational or personal pension benefits into a self-invested pension scheme. The FCA fined and prohibited him from performing senior management functions after failing to comply with its requirements. Mr Burns then referred the FCA’s decision to the Upper Tribunal. The Upper Tribunal dismissed the reference but lowered the financial penalty to almost a quarter its quantum. Mr Burns was found personally liable in that he failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that his business complied with the FCA’s relevant requirements.…
Insights 19 Sep, 2018
Drone-related news stories range from stories about the use of drones by emergency services, for example helping firefighters tackle the Californian wildfires, to tragic stories, such as that of the attempted assassination of the Venezuelan president through the use of explosive drones. In the wake of the Salisbury nerve agent attack, the Military of Defence has tested a fleet of drones that can detect the presence of chemical weapons. In short, drones come in many shapes and sizes. This short article discusses the regulation of drones used for commercial and recreational purposes only (i.e. not combat drones). Amongst other things, it addresses: the current position in the UK; EU drone regulations; and for comparison purposes, drone regulation in the UAE. “Internationally,…
Insights 17 Sep, 2018
Peter Linstead assesses the impact of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Royal Mail Ltd v Jhuti [2017] EWCA Civ 1632. It held that when considering whether the principal reason for dismissal is that the claimant made a protected disclosure, only the motivation of the decision-maker can be taken into account under s.103A ERA. Additionally, if dismissal is on the basis of fabricated evidence, which the line manager has provided because the claimant made a protected disclosure, that will not be an automatically unfair dismissal. This reversed the decision of the EAT, which had held that a dismissal decision made in ignorance of the truth, which has been manipulated by someone in a managerial position, can be attributed to the…
Insights 1 Dec, 2017
On 6th April 2017 the Supreme Court delivered judgement in this widely publicised appeal against the decision of the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench Division of 13th May 2016. Lady Hale provided the leading judgement, which was agreed by Lords Neuberger, Mance, Reed and Hughes. The decision is of importance to local authorities, schools and parents across England and Wales because it clarifies the meaning of regular school attendance. Parents may be prosecuted under section 444 of the Education Act 1996 for failing to ensure regular attendance. Prior to this decision uncertainty existed around the correct interpretation of the word “regularly” in this context. As will be seen, the Supreme Court has concluded that the term means in accordance…
Insights 7 Apr, 2017
