Monthly Archives: October 2016


R v Tomasz Kroker

Published: 31/10/2016 | News

James Rozier today appeared for the Defendant at Reading Crown Court in the case of R v Tomasz Kroker. On the 10th October 2016 the Defendant entered guilty pleas in respect of four counts of Death by Dangerous Driving, and a fifth count of Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving. The case was listed for […]

read more

Updated guidance: consent following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board

Published: 31/10/2016 | News

Updated guidance on consent following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. Following the Supreme Court ruling of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 the Royal College of Surgeons  has published updated guidance as to how practitioners should approach the consent process with patients. ‘Consent: Supported Decision-Making – A Good Practice Guide’ is essential reading […]

read more

Personal Injury Update: October 2016

Published: 31/10/2016 | Newsletters, Personal Injury

Contents News Foreseeability of injury – Keeping it real Fixed costs regime and the multi-track: does the rational of Qader apply to Employer’s Liability claims as well? Case Law Update To download a copy of this month’s update, click here. To subscribe to the Personal Injury Updates, click here. News By Huw Davies, Editor In […]

read more

Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependents) Act 1975, S.4: Out of time Applications

Published: 18/10/2016 | News

‘It is not only Heaven that helps those who help themselves’ An Application for reasonable financial provision under Section 2 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependents) Act 1975 (‘the 1975 Act’) must normally be made within 6 months of the date on which effective representation with respect to the estate is first taken […]

read more

Geoffrey Williams QC represents Solicitor who admitted dishonesty but avoided striking off

Published: 17/10/2016 | News

Geoffrey Williams QC represented a Solicitor, Mr GP, in proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Mr P admitted that he had been dishonest in backdating a witness statement in civil proceedings and asserting that the statement was in fact in time when it was not. Geoffrey was successful in proving that this was an isolated […]

read more