Issue 60 - June 2005
The Court of Appeal once again had to consider the size of an appropriate fine following a successful prosecution for Health and Safety offences. See also R v P&O European Ferries (Issue 55)
Issue 60 - June 2005
The Court of Appeal once again had to consider the size of an appropriate fine following a successful prosecution for Health and Safety offences. See also R v P&O European Ferries (Issue 55)
Issue 55 - January 2005
How will the court assess the size of an appropriate fine following the successful prosecutionfor health and safety offences?
Issue 52 - October 2004
Which party controlled the way in which work was carried out on site?
Issue 50 - August 2004
Here, in a personal injury claim for injuries caused by tripping on floor studs at a construction site, the Court had to decide who was in control and responsible for that site.
Issue 50 - August 2004
HHJ Thornton QC provides guidance on the amount of money likely to be ordered in a claim for damages for inconvenience, loss and anxiety.
Links
[1] https://www.fenwickelliott.com/sites/default/files/docs/dispatch/Dispatch_issue_60.pdf
[2] https://www.fenwickelliott.com/sites/default/files/docs/dispatch/Dispatch_issue_55.pdf
[3] https://www.fenwickelliott.com/sites/default/files/docs/dispatch/Dispatch_issue_52.pdf
[4] https://www.fenwickelliott.com/sites/default/files/docs/dispatch/Dispatch_issue_50.pdf
[5] https://www.fenwickelliott.com/print/research-insight/newsletters/dispatch/other?page=9