L & M -v-Lady Heyes Glamping Centre
The 2 Claimants sustained physical, psychiatric & respiratory injuries in an incident which was reported upon in the national media.
A specialist Forensic Fire Expert was instructed to assess the extent to which the Defendants were negligent for failing to provide an alternative means of escape from the Glamping Pod they were using which contained a real fire burner.
Initially denying that they were in any way responsible, offers were made by The Defendants and the cases settled before Trial and after Court Proceedings had been issued.
L -v- Total Fitness Gyms
The Claimant who was disabled, suffered significant injuries whilst on the Defendants premises.
The Defendants chose to deny any breach of their lawful duty of care to the Claimant by way of The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 and so Court Proceedings were commenced resulting in an out of Court Settlement for the Claimant.
D -v- Leyton Healthcare Limited
The Claimant was a Protected Party due to dementia and suffered injuries whilst in a respite care home due to failings of the company providing her with the care. Damages for the Claimant were awarded and approved in The High Court.
G -v- Lloyds Bank
The Claimant was an employee of the Defendant working at their local branch when masked assailants raided the bank.
Formal allegations of negligence were made against the bank and as such, the Defendant agreed to deal with the matter and pay to The Claimant significant compensation damages on a without prejudice basis.
The injuries were purely of a psychiatric nature and for which medical evidence was obtained from a consultant psychiatrist.
F -v- The Waltons
The Claimant sustained injuries and brought a claim for damages against her Landlords.
The matter proceeded to a full Trial Hearing following which the Claimant was awarded damages in full.
It was commented upon by the Trial Judge that the evidence of the Defendants was not believed.
If it is required in any case, it is only correct that Claimant Lawyers will take the appropriate steps in Court proceedings to ensure that the authenticity of all evidence of any Defendant is scrutinised. (see Spencer Smith -v- Ashwell Maintenance Limited)
P -v- Ministry of Justice
The Claimant was a private in the army when he sustained injuries as a result of the defective premises of the Defendant.
As the Claimant was an infantry man, the MOJ medical board decided to discharge the Claimant. The case was settled after Court Proceedings were issued as a result of the Defendant at first refusing to make any acceptable offers of settlement.
R-v- Covea Insurance
The Claimant sustained a fractured spine when she fell down a spiral staircase in her own home as a direct result of inadequate maintenance of the staircase by her landlord.
Liability was denied which led to the Claimant instituting Court proceedings resulting in the case the case being settled shortly before trial.