No5 Barristers Chambers
10 Experts
3 Contributions by No5 Barristers Chambers Experts
PRECEDENTS
IN THE [ INSERT COURT ] COURT
Claim No [ claim number ]
BETWEEN:— [ CLAIMANT’S NAME ] Claimant and [ DEFENDANT’S NAME ] Defendant
PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
The Claimant’s date of birth is [ insert date ].
Throughout the relevant period, the Claimant was under the care of the Defendant, a self-employed general dental practitioner working from premises at [ insert address ] (“the clinic”), who represented [ himself OR herself ] as an experienced, proficient and competent dental professional.
The Claimant initially attended an appointment with the Defendant on [ insert date ] for [ insert details of treatment ].
In brief, the Claimant contends that the dental care delivered to [ him OR her ] between [ insert dates ] was negligent as set out in these Particulars of Claim. Consequently, [ insert details of causation and loss ]...
PI & Clinical Negligence
Q&As
At the heart of the query lies the status of a party who does not adhere to a court direction, yet has lodged an application to extend the time for compliance before the expiry of the deadline attached to that direction. On the scenario set out, the claimant will be in breach of the court order concerning the exchange of witness statements in two weeks’ time, because that order will not have been varied before the deadline for compliance under that order...
PI & Clinical Negligence
Q&As
When a defendant defeats a claim, the default position is that the claimant must meet the defendant’s legal costs arising from the claim. Yet CPR 44.2(1)(a) gives the court freedom to decide if, and by whom, costs should be paid. In proceedings with multiple defendants, that discretion allows the court to order an unsuccessful co-defendant, instead of the claimant, to bear the successful defendant’s costs in such circumstances as appropriate...
PI & Clinical Negligence
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
