When you are dealing with tort law, there really is only one work to turn to - Clerk & Lindsell on Torts. With an unrivalled reputation, it gives you guidance on the entire range of torts, from first principles through to negligence, defamation and passing-off.
Part of the Common Law Library, Clerk & Lindsell is clearly written and set out in an easy-to-use style. With coverage of key legislation and case law, it really is a must-have for any tort law practitioner.
Publishing November 2012, the 2nd supplement to the 20th edition of Clerk & Lindsell on Torts brings the main work up to date with all the latest developments including decisions of the Supreme Court in:
• Durham v BAI (Run Off) Ltd where the Supreme Court revisited the test of causation in cases of asbestos-induced mesothelioma for the purposes of interpreting employers’ liability insurance policies
• Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd on the application of the Reynolds defence to an action in defamation
• AB v Ministry of Defence where the Supreme Court held that claims for injury or death, allegedly caused to ex-servicemen by radiation exposure during nuclear testing in the 1950s, were time-barred.
• Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust where it was held that a public body (in this case a NHS hospital) could be in breach of article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights where it fails to deal with imminent and clear threats to life if the victim (a voluntary mental patient) is “especially vulnerable by reason of their physical or mental condition”
• In Austin v UK the European Court of Human Rights held that the police practice of containing a crowd behind a police cordon did not involve breach of article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights provided that it was the least intrusive and most effective means of averting a real risk of serious injury to people in the crowd
A number of important decisions have also been handed down by the Court of Appeal:
• Williams v University of Birmingham clarified the correct test for breach of duty in a case of asbestos-induced mesothelioma
• Blair v Chief Constable of Sussex Police on the meaning of “practicability” under the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992; Whitehead v Trustees of the Chatsworth Settlement on the meaning of “practicable” under reg.12 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998; and Gaith v Indesit Co UK Ltd on the requirement to reduce relevant risk to employees to the lowest level reasonably practicable under the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 reg.4.
• An Informer v A Chief Constable holding that the police do not undertake to protect the financial welfare of informants and so do not owe a duty of care to prevent an informant from suffering economic loss
• Delaney v Pickett holding that an action by a passenger against a negligent driver was not defeated by the ex turpi causa defence, notwithstanding that it was probable that both parties were in possession of cannabis with intent to supply
• Selwood v Durham CC where it was held that it was at least arguable that two NHS Trusts had assumed responsibility to a social worker employed by a local authority who was attacked and seriously injured by a mental health patient
• Lloyds TSB Bank Plc v Markandan & Uddin (A Firm) on the interpretation of s.61 of the Trustee Act 1925, the defendant solicitors having put themselves in breach of trust by releasing mortgage funds without the necessary documentation
• Roder UK Ltd v West on the interpretation of the Statute of Frauds Amendment Act 1828 (no defence where company directors fraudulently persuaded a creditor to hold off with an assurance that payment would be made from the future sale of certain company assets)
• Berezovsky v Abramovich on the scope of the tort of intimidation
• Hutcheson (formerly KGM) v News Group Newspapers Ltd on a claimant’s reasonable expectation of privacy under article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights
• Goldsmith v Patchcott and Turnbull v Warrener where the Court of Appeal considered the application of s.2(2) of the Animals Act 1971, and its relationship to defences under s.5 of the Act
• Mayor of London v Samede where the Court of Appeal addressed the extent to which articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights restricted the power of the owner of premises to evict trespassing protesters
• R (on the application of Faulkner) v Secretary of State for Justice and Sturnham v Secretary of State for Justice on the proper approach to the assessment of damages for breach of a claimant’s article 5 Convention rights
• Ramzan v Brookwide Ltd on the measure of damages arising from trespass to land
• Chandler v Cape plc imposing liability, in certain circumstances, on a parent company in respect of the negligence of a subsidiary company towards the subsidiary’s employees
• Simpson v Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust on the validity of an assignment of a cause of action in tort for personal injuries.
• Weddall v Barchester Healthcare Ltd on the interpretation of the term “course of employment” for the purposes of vicarious liability
• Woodland v Swimming Teachers' Association on whether an education authority owed a “non-delegable duty” to see that reasonable care was taken of a pupil during a swimming lesson provided by a third party
• Francis v London Borough of Southwark on whether an action for breach of statutory duty lay for wrongfully preventing the claimant from exercising his “right to buy” a council property under the Housing Act 1985
• Barr v Biffa Waste Services on whether nuisance emanating from a waste-tipping site constituted a common law nuisance; and whether the defendants could rely on the defence of statutory authority
• RDC Promotions v Lawrence on whether noise from a motor-racing stadium constituted a nuisance; and whether the grant of planning permission had changed the nature of the locality for the purposes of an action in nuisance
