Duncan v british coal 1998
WebAttia v British Gas - anomalies in law. Woman witnessed house burning down and claim succeeded. Primary victims... Dulieu v White - primary victim is present at the scene and at risk of injury. D liable for nervous shock when C feared for her own safety as a result of a horse and van crashing into a pub where she worked. WebDuncan v. British Coal [1990] 1 All ER 540, 566 Dusky v. United States (1960) 362 US 402, 52, 55 ... White v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1998] 3 WLR 1509, 567–8 …
Duncan v british coal 1998
Did you know?
WebBritish Airways Pension Trustees Ltd v British Airways plc [2002] PLR 247: 242, 244, 248, 254-255 British Coal Corp v British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd [1994] OPLR 51: 53 British Coal Corp v British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd [1995] 1 All ER 912: 100, 163-164, 199, 268 Brittlebank, Re (1881) 30 WR … WebThe Facts. S was employed at a steelworks in Cambuslang. He suffered a severe blow to the head which caused headaches, dizziness and blurred vision for several weeks. His employers were found liable for this injury and S was awarded £3,573 compensation. After the accident, S, who had earlier warned British Steel of the danger inherent in the ...
WebApr 28, 2015 · However, in Hunter v British Coal Corp (1998), a co-worker who was some 30 metres away from an accident failed to recover for nervous shock, and a similar decision was reached in Duncan v British Coal Corp (1997). WebThis is an appeal by the plaintiff, John Hunter, from a judgment of Judge Bentley QC in the Sheffield County Court on 24 April 1997 when he ordered that judgment be entered for …
Web"rescue" work. Again, in Duncan v. British Coal Corp., which the Court of Appeal considered at the same time, a pit deputy was not considered a "rescuer" when he rushed to help a colleague trapped in a conveyor machine: the incident occurred while the plaintiff was 275 metres away, and the victim was dead by the time the plaintiff arrived. WebMay 19, 2024 · Dunn v British Coal Corporation: CA 10 Mar 1993 Medical history disclosure was not limited to injury since the matters revealed could affect earnings losses claim. Citations: Gazette 21-Apr-1993, Independent 10-Mar-1993 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice, Personal Injury Updated: 19 May 2024; Ref: scu.80179
WebIn Duncan v British Coal Corp, a plaintiff who was only 275 yards away from the accident and arrived at the accident scene just 4 minutes later but saw no injury or blood was not sufficiently proximate. 4. Reasonable foreseeability ... Law Comm Report 1998: recommended reform of the test for secondary victims by
WebJan 1, 1998 · 94 E L R Vol 2 pp 94-100 The recent decision of the House of Lords in Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd, Hunter v London Docklands Development Corporation1 raises issues which are central to the law of nuisance, both in Scotland and in England. Canary Wharf Tower was built on a site in the London docklands in the late 1980s. The tower is 250 … ray fowler matthewWebFeb 2, 2010 · Hunter v British Coal Corp [1998] 2 All ER 97, [1998] 3 WLR 685, CA. ... Duncan v British Coal Corp [1997] 1 All ER 540 at 563, [1998] QB 254 at 278, following those of Lord Hope in Robertson v Forth Road Bridge Joint Board, Rough v Forth Road Bridge Joint Board 1995 SCLR 466 at 475, the plaintiff was an active participant in the … ray fourth routine beautyWebDec 12, 2024 · Hunter v British Coal Corporation, Cementation Mining Company: CA 11 Feb 1998. A workman, who did not see an accident, but suffered shock after thinking that … simple themes for powerpoint presentationWebMay 19, 2024 · Dunn v British Coal Corporation: CA 10 Mar 1993 Medical history disclosure was not limited to injury since the matters revealed could affect earnings … simple theodolitehttp://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Hunter-v-British-Coal-Corporation.php simple theory gear pack stove xl for saleWebAug 30, 2024 · Student lawyer Joanna Garvey-Smith assesses how the law categorises victims in the case of Hunter v British Coal Corp [1999] Q.B. 140; [1998] 2 WLUK 195 … ray fowler of goff petroleumHunter v British Coal [1998] 2 All ER 97 NEGLIGENCE – EMPLOYER DUTY OF CARE – PSYCHIATRIC DAMAGE – DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VICTIMS – PROXIMITY TO TRAUMATIC EVENT Facts The claimant (C) was driving along a roadway in a mine owned by the defendant company (D) … See more The claimant (C) was driving along a roadway in a mine owned by the defendant company (D) when he drove into a hydrant, … See more In finding for D the Court of Appeal rejected C’s argument; there was no case in which a person, who had not been present at the scene of an accident and who had not come upon the scene as a rescuer, had been … See more This case called for a close consideration of the categories of ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victim set out in Alcock v Chief Constable of South … See more simple therapy games