header-logo header-logo

Belt up?

25 March 2010 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Denning’s guidelines stand the test of time, says Karen O’Sullivan

During Lord Denning’s 20 year tenure as Master of the Rolls and head of the civil side of the Court of Appeal he had an enormous impact upon the development of the law and was credited for his simple, clear and direct style of judgment. In celebrated decisions he championed the deserted wife and gave property rights to cohabitees. Somewhat less famous, but nonetheless important to those dealing with personal injury claims, were the guidelines he provided for apportioning liability in cases where a claimant fails to wear a seatbelt.

His judgment in Froom v Butcher [1975] 3 All ER 520 sets out an easy to follow formula:
l  If the failure to wear a seatbelt made no difference to the injuries sustained then there should be no deduction for contributory negligence.
l If the seatbelt would have reduced the claimant’s injuries then a deduction of 15% should be made for contributory negligence.
l If the injuries would have been entirely avoided by the claimant wearing a seatbelt

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll