Case Studies
& Testimonials

The client was involved in a road traffic collision on a roundabout whereby she was thrown from her vehicle and suffered serious injuries, particularly a fracture of her femur requiring internal fixation. The fracture failed to unite, and the client underwent revision fixation and bone grafting, but this also went on to a non-union.

Liability was an issue and proceedings were commenced against 2 Defendants including the Claimant’s husband who was the driver of the vehicle in which the client was a passenger. A split trial was ordered to determine the issue of liability in advance of quantum. Leading Counsel was instructed (Mr Nicholas Hinchcliffe QC). In total, the client underwent 9 major operations, but was left with a grossly abnormal gait and her walking became restricted. The case was interesting but demanding due to the severity of the Claimant’s injuries and the need for future care and home adaptations to be made. The client was a Canadian national who returned to Canada several months after the accident.

Appointments with the client were conducted by Skype as well as the instruction of experts in Nova Scotia, Canada. The instructions had to be detailed to enable the experts to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules when preparing their report. Following an agreement in relation to liability and all parties finalising expert evidence, following a JSM and further discussions between the parties, the case was settled for £850,000 gross.

The client was cycling when he was struck by a motor vehicle performing a U-turn manoeuvre. He sustained a closed fracture of the left clavicle involving comminution and displacement. The client later developed frozen shoulder which, along with psychological sequela, impacted his ability to return to work. The medical evidence did not corroborate with the client’s opinions about his ability to work, so the future loss of earnings claim was fiercely disputed.

The claim was challenging because the client wished to put forward a loss of earnings claim (and did so) for a sum in excess of £250,000. The Defendant pleaded exaggeration. It required careful analysis of the client’s injuries and medical history in order to advise the client upon the options and risks in the matter. An agreed settlement was reached in the sum of £40,000.

The Defendant was involved in a road traffic collision with another vehicle which consequently caused a second collision with the vehicle that our client was driving. As a result, the client, who was a college student at the time of the accident, suffered life changing injuries. The effect of his injuries will last the duration of his life and will progressively deteriorate as he ages.

The case required a significant degree of future prediction predicated upon the client’s parents and siblings (in terms of their achievements). The schedule addressed future loss of earnings and care requirements. The client was unable to attend university due to his injuries. Detailed instructions were taken in regard to the client’s witness evidence detailing his injuries, intended career path and how the accident caused him to change course. Proceedings were issued and reached exchange of joint expert’s reports. The claim was settled at a JSM for £700,000 net.

A very unusual case. The client is the widow and executrix of the Estate. Her husband was exercising in a gym when he collapsed after suffering a heart attack. A dependency claim and Law Reform Act claim was made on behalf of the estate against the gym for failing to apply a defibrillator to the client. Court proceedings were issued and liability was disputed.

The case was interesting as there were several contested issues. We engaged Leading Counsel to advise upon the duty of care and the extent of that duty to members. In particular, the duty of staff to go to the aid of a member and provide first aid. An opinion of a Consultant Cardiologist was sought to give evidence on the effect of the delay by the gym staff in applying the defibrillator to the client. Further, causation was firmly in dispute as the client had pre-existing heart difficulties. The parties reached settlement for £250,000.