He is predominantly, but not exclusively, instructed on behalf of defendants and acts for many of the major UK insurance companies. In the field of employers’ liability, in addition to cases of accidental injury, Christopher has considerable experience in “industrial disease” litigation involving WRULD, vibration induced injury, deafness and asbestos related disease etc.In the field of public liability Christopher acts for local councils in highway cases and has an extensive practice dealing with claims against the “leisure industry” representing a number of leading holiday venues and hotels. He has considerable experience of clinical negligence litigation covering a wide spectrum from birth injuries through delayed diagnosis of cancers to negligent surgery.
Emmanuel College Cambridge – M.A., LL.B.
Middle Temple
PIBA
Burton v Butlins Skyline Ltd
County Court (Reigate) [2016] 12 WLUK 115
Breach of duty of care; Foreseeability; Glassing; Occupiers’ liability; Pubs and bars; Violence
Clark v Bourne Leisure Ltd
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) [2011] EWCA Civ 753
Occupiers’ liability; Personal injury; Reasonable care; Wheelchairs
Bourne Leisure Ltd (t/a British Holidays) v Marsden
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) [2009] EWCA Civ 671
Caravan sites; fatal accident duty of care
Tedstone v Bourne Leisure Ltd (t/a Thoresby Hall Hotel & Spa)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) [2008] EWCA Civ 654
Personal injury, hotel, Duty of care
Sherlock v Chester City Council (2004) EWCA Civ 201 (Employers’ Liability/ Co-extensive breach of statutory duty by employer and employee)
Griffiths v Vauxhall Motors LTD [2003] EWCA Civ 412 (Employers Liability/P.U.W.E.R.)
Willbye v Gibbons [2003] EWCA Civ 372 (Damages)
Laverton v Kiapasha [2002] EWCA Cur 1656 (Occupiers Liability)
R v Merseyside Coroner Exp CARR [1994] 1WLR 578
Blamire v South Cumbria H.A. [1993] PIQR Q.1 (Damages)
The Defendant was successful on appeal in overturning the prior order granting relief from sanction where the Claimant had failed to file their costs budget on time, necessitating a further hearing.
On appeal the court held that that the Claimant’s failure to hold an MOT in relation to his damaged vehicle did not prevent him from hiring a credit hire vehicle with an MOT under the principle of betterment.
The Defendant was successful on appeal in overturning the prior order granting relief from sanction where the Claimant had failed to file their costs budget on time, necessitating a further hearing.
On appeal the court held that that the Claimant’s failure to hold an MOT in relation to his damaged vehicle did not prevent him from hiring a credit hire vehicle with an MOT under the principle of betterment.
The Defendant was successful on appeal in overturning the prior order granting relief from sanction where the Claimant had failed to file their costs budget on time, necessitating a further hearing.
The Defendant was successful on appeal in overturning the prior order granting relief from sanction where the Claimant had failed to file their costs budget on time, necessitating a further hearing.
On appeal the court held that that the Claimant’s failure to hold an MOT in relation to his damaged vehicle did not prevent him from hiring a credit hire vehicle with an MOT under the principle of betterment.