Commentary: Earnings: Butterworths Personal Injury Litigation Service [1303] states: ‘In order to comply with the 100% principle of compensation, credit must be given for any significant expenses that would have been incurred by the claimant had he remained working normally.’ You may find useful the case of Eagle v Chambers (No 2). In this case the claimant sought damages after being hit by a car driven by the defendant. The trial judge deducted 15% from the claimant's past loss of earnings claim to account for saved travelling expenses. The claimant argued that the deduction should not have been made relying on a passage in the

The operators of supermarkets and other premises open to the public owe duties under both common law and statute (specifically the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957) to take reasonable steps to ensure that visitors to the premises are reasonably safe. While some trips or slips in a supermarket will not be actionable as they will not arise out of a breach of duty (many simply amounting to accidents without any fault) in some circumstances a trip or slip may be the result

The dominant owner is not normally under an obligation to repair the subject matter of the easement. If, however, disrepair in the easement would cause actionable damage to the servient tenement, the dominant owner may be practically obliged to maintain the easement to avoid causing a nuisance or trespass. The questions of who has an obligation to repair an access way and who has the right to repair an access way were answered by Longmore LJ in Carter v Cole (at para [8]) by setting out the following propositions:

It is assumed for the purposes of this question that the loan in question is that of one of the parties themselves, and not of one of the children of the family. When dealing with a financial remedy application, section 25(2)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) requires the court to have regard, inter alia, to ‘the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the

We are not aware of any guidance which imposes a general requirement that a litigant in person must be asked to approve a draft order. The Equal Treatment Bench Book provides extensive guidance on assisting litigants in person and ensuring fairness, clarity and understanding, but it does not address the approval of draft orders. The Ministry of Justice research report Litigants in Person in Private Family Law Cases describes how draft and consent orders are handled in practice, including the use of approval hearings where judges have concerns, but it does not propose or endorse any procedural

It is assumed that the query relates to the revocation of an ordinary power of attorney in the context of a commercial, business-to-business transaction. Revocation of a Power of Attorney A general power of attorney is capable of revocation in the following circumstances: • expressly, on notice by the donor to the donee • impliedly, where the donor’s acts are inconsistent with the authority of the power of attorney continuing • by effluxion of time • the death, mental incapacity, bankruptcy, winding up or dissolution of the donor • on the fulfilment or frustration of the purpose of the power of attorney Where a power of attorney has been expressed to be irrevocable, and is given to secure: • a proprietary interest of the attorney, or • the performance

This Q&A has assumed that reference is being made to the ability to claim under a new home warranty, ie, the insurance policy which protects the buyer for structural defects relating to the property. The answer to this question will depend on the nature of the claim. New build properties usually have insurance cover against construction and similar defects under the Buildmark Scheme operated by the National Home Building Council (NHBC) or similar. NHBC cover is for ten years from the date of legal completion of the purchase. The case of Griffiths and another v Liberty Syndicate 4472 was one which related to a building converted for residential use with common parts which the claimants argued were defective. The new home warranty policy relating to common parts expired on 3 October 2010. The defects were brought to the developer’s and insurer’s attention on around 5 July 2009.

Guidance on what should go into an agreement concerning the additional cost condition Section 30 of the Care Act 2014 and the Care and Support and After-care (Choice of Accommodation) Regulations 2014, SI 2014/2670 entitle an individual to select the accommodation of their choice to provide residential care. If the cost of the chosen accommodation is more than the amount

A particular problem for can arise for personal representatives (PRs) where they are aware that there is a beneficiary or indeed a creditor that needs to be paid from the estate but that beneficiary or creditor cannot be located. One way in which executors can deal with this is to obtain insurance cover against the risk of the missing beneficiary or creditor subsequently appearing and making a claim. Where the

The procedure for an application for a non-molestation order under the Family Law Act 1996 is provided for in the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 10. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 10.2(1) requires that an application for an occupation order or a non-molestation order must be supported by a witness statement. If the application is made without notice, the witness statement must state the reasons why notice has not been given. The witness statement in support of the application must

Civil Procedure Rules Civil Procedure Rule 54 (CPR 54) contains the applicable rules regarding judicial review. CPR 54.8(2) sets out the following: 'In principle a defendant who states grounds of opposition in the acknowledgment of service is entitled to be awarded the costs of so doing if permission is refused. In order to avoid having to make a separate application later, the defendant's application for costs should be included in the acknowledgment form: R (on the application of Leach) v Commissioner for Local Administration' Although you will note that the commentary in the Green Book goes on to state that the ‘acknowledgment of service’ should be accompanied by a schedule, it does not set out

Is there an implied term that restrictions entered into by a subsidiary in a contract extend to group companies? Company as a separate legal entity In considering this question, a starting point is Salomon v Salomon, which is authority for the general principle that if a company has complied with requirements relating to incorporation in the companies legislation, it is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from the individual members of the company. The corporate veil can only be pierced in limited situations—for further information, see Commentary: Piercing the corporate veil: Halsbury's Laws of England. Commentary and case authorities suggest that under the ordinary rules of law, a parent company and a subsidiary company are distinct legal entities. See: EBBW Vale Urban District Council v South Wales Traffic Area Licensing Authority. Cohen LJ stated: 'Under the ordinary rules of law, a parent company and a subsidiary