Issues with service

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—30 January 2025

This week's edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes a news analysis of how advances in neurotechnology may impact the personal injury and clinical negligence industry, a case in which QOCS protection was reinstated by the Court of Appeal in a ‘mixed’ claim and a case analysis where the Court of Appeal again considered whether the police held a duty of care to protect the public from third party harm, following on from the Supreme Court decision in Tindall. We also bring you details of the updated guidance published by HMCTS for the Damages Claims pilot scheme under CPR PD 51ZB. In addition, we have our usual roundup of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest.

No police duty to protect from third party harm—applying the Tindall principles (Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police v Woodcock, HD and others v Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: In this conjoined appeal, the Court of Appeal considered whether the police held a duty of care to protect Ms Woodcock and CJ from harm caused by a third party; and whether the police’s investigative duty, pursuant to Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights, can arise before the claimant has suffered ill treatment at the hands of a third party. This decision represents the first occasion upon which the Court of Appeal has been asked to apply the Supreme Court’s decision in Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police and has provided some important points of practical application to practitioners in this area. Written by Jennie Oborne, barrister at Deka Chambers.

Neurotechnology and the law—Personal injury and clinical negligence

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: Harry Lambert, a barrister at Crown Office Chambers and founder and head of the Centre for Neurotechnology and Law, considers the coming advances in neurotechnology and their potential impact upon rehabilitation and game-changing implications for personal injury and clinical negligence.

Secondary Victim Claims and Medical Negligence—what is the future after Paul? (Part 2)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: Alex Stutt of Anthony Gold discusses the landmark Supreme Court case of Paul and another (Appellants) v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (Respondent) [2024] UKSC 1 and considers the impact of the court’s comments on duty of care.