Personal Injury analysis: Andrew Warnock QC, barrister at 1 Chancery Lane, examines the case of Sumner v Colborne, in which the court had to consider the potential liability of landowners for road traffic accidents which had arguably been caused by poor visibility due to roadside vegetation.

The group of persons that are appropriate persons in respect of a particular significant pollutant linkage for the purposes of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, pt IIA.

Introduction This Practice Note considers liability in laser hair removal claims. It outlines the legal framework governing such claims, including duty of care, breach, causation and quantum, and addresses regulatory obligations, professional guidance, evidential issues and common injury profiles. What is laser hair removal? Laser hair removal is a cosmetic procedure intended to reduce unwanted hair through the use of laser or intense pulsed light (IPL) technology. These treatments operate by delivering pulses of light energy to hair follicles, damaging them in order to inhibit or delay future hair growth. Multiple treatment sessions are typically required, as hair grows in cycles and can only be effectively targeted during particular growth phases. Claims arising from laser hair removal treatment usually fall within personal injury law in negligence. Although the procedure may sometimes be performed by medically qualified practitioners, it is frequently carried out by therapists or aesthetic practitioners working in cosmetic clinics or beauty salons. Where treatment is provided by a medical practitioner, the claim may be approached as a clinical negligence

Commercial insurance covering the risks against a third-party claim, or in case of employer liability insurance, claims by employees.

This Practice Note outlines the characteristic features of liability insurance and different types of liability insurance available. It also examines the scope of cover under liability policies and provides guidance regarding ascertainment of liabilities and the reasonableness of loss settlements, together with guidance on common issues that arise in relation to liability insurance, including joint and composite insurance and the application of the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (TP(RAI)A 2010). The related documents pod on the right includes links to further guidance on specific aspects of liability insurance, including notification of claims and circumstances, defence of claims, and to guidance on particular forms of liability insurance. What is liability insurance? Liability insurance is a form of insurance which covers the insured against the risk of incurring liability to a third party. Just like property insurance, it covers the insured against loss. However, whereas under most forms of property insurance the insurer undertakes to pay the amount of the loss suffered by the insured as a result of the damage or destruction of the insured property,

This Practice Note provides guidance on notification provisions in liability insurance policies. It explains the purpose of notification clauses and provides guidance on how to notify claims or circumstances to insurers, including what to notify and when. It also provides guidance as to the potential consequences if a notification requirement is not complied with properly. This Practice Note also provides guidance on the rights and obligations of insurers and insureds in relation to the insured’s duty to mitigate its losses and in relation to the defence and settlement of claims. For information about liability insurance generally, see Practice Note: Liability insurance. The related documents pod on the right includes links to further guidance on liability insurance and to guidance on its particular forms. Liability policies almost invariably include a condition (often a condition precedent) requiring the insured to notify the insurer within a stipulated time of any claims made against them. Furthermore, policies written on a claims made basis nearly all impose an obligation on the insured to notify

An agreement purporting to limit the amount of liability owed to a company by its auditor in respect of any negligence, default, breach of duty or breach of trust occurring in the course of the audit of accounts of which the auditor may be guilty in relation to the company.

What does this Practice Note cover? This Practice Note provides an overview of liability management techniques for bonds (including bond buybacks, tender offers, exchange offers and consent solicitation), with a focus on the process, documentation and key legal and regulatory considerations involved in such transactions. This Practice Note covers primarily investment-grade bonds issued in the UK and European markets. For more information on liability management exercises, liability management transactions of loans/credit agreements, see Practice Note: FAQs on Liability Management Exercises. What is liability management in relation to bonds? The term liability management is used to describe a variety of techniques used by issuers to actively manage or restructure their outstanding bond liabilities. Common liability management transactions include: • bond buyback • tender offer • exchange offer, and • consent solicitation Note that a liability management transaction can also be structured to be a combination of these techniques. For example, an exchange or tender offer can be combined with: • an issue of new bonds to fund the offer, or • a consent solicitation

Personal Injury analysis: The liability of the keeper of an animal for the damage the animal caused in a road traffic accident was the issue before the Court of Appeal in Williams v Hawkes. Catherine Collins, of Iscoed Chambers, examines the court’s decision.

Under certain circumstances, directors of a company may be held liable for a transaction entered into by the company if the transaction is done in contravention of doing so without a trading certificate.

This Practice Note considers who is liable under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), and covers employer liability and employee liability. It looks at the ways in which an employer may be directly or indirectly liable for contraventions of EqA 2010 such as discrimination or other prohibited conduct claims including harassment and victimisation. Types of liability An employer may be liable for contraventions of EqA 2010: • on its own behalf: see, generally, Practice Notes: Employment events which give rise to discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims and Equal pay: how claims work • vicariously, for the acts of its employees: see Vicarious liability of employers, below • as principal, for the acts of its agents: see Liability for agents, below Until 30 October 2026, an employer has no explicit liability under EqA 2010 for harassment by third parties. From that date, the position changes and an employer is under a duty to prevent harassment of their employees by third parties. For further information, see: Employers' liability for the actions of

This Practice Note considers the test for an employer’s vicarious liability in tort, which arises from certain legal relationships and in relation to certain acts. It also considers liability in ‘relationships akin to employment’ and the circumstances in which more than one employer may be vicariously liable (dual vicarious liability). It examines the ‘close connection test’, which establishes the required connection between the relationship and the wrongful act, re-considered by the Supreme Court in Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB. It sets out the position in relation to liability for the acts of independent contractors and goes on to outline when an employer may be liable for the torts of another person’s employees and where liability to third persons regarding contracts (express and ostensible agency) may arise. This Practice Note also outlines liability for breach of confidence and privacy and breach of data protection obligations, vicarious liability for statutory torts and an employer’s