- PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—29 October 2020
- In this issue:
- Informed consent is necessary to recover sums beyond fixed costs on a solicitor-client assessment
- What amounts to a significant development so as to justify variation of a costs budget?
- Coronavirus (COVID-19)
- Relief from sanctions in applications under CPR 3.6 and whether the coronavirus pandemic constitutes a good reason for non-compliance
- Coronavirus (COVID-19)—HMCTS publishes updated operational summary for week commencing 26 October
- CJC seeks opinions on Pre-action Protocols ahead of review
- CPRC minutes
- Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—3 July 2020
- LexTalk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®PSL community
- Collaborate and network with a community of expert lawyers
- Daily and weekly news alerts
- Dates for your diary
- New Q&As
- Useful information
This week’s edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes analysis of a costs case in which the High Court found that a client had not given informed consent for their solicitor to recover any sums beyond fixed costs (Belsner v Cam Legal Services). We also have news that the Civil Justice Council has launched a review of the Pre-action Protocols. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other key cases and news, as well as New Law Journal articles of interest and recently published Q&As.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial