Legal News

In May 2025, Golfweek stated that Spanish golfer Jon Rahm hit a supporter with a golf ball during the 2025 PGA Championship. That episode was said to be the third occasion on which this player had inadvertently struck a spectator with a shot. On the earlier instance, in 2022, the injured onlooker — a news presenter — was reported to have sustained injuries to the face. While there is extensive case law on the duty of care owed between participants in sport, what is the legal position when a spectator, or an employee carrying out duties at a match, is hurt by a golf ball, football, ice hockey puck, vehicle, horse or even a player who unintentionally leaves the field of play? Although it might feel reasonable that they should be able to recover damages from the organiser of the event, or even the...

What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling reiterates that damages-based agreements ( DBAs) are permissible only where the claimant seeks damages, or another financial remedy, flowing directly from the claim itself. If that criterion is not met, the DBA is unenforceable and no fees incurred under it are recoverable. Accordingly, in proceedings such as these, where declaratory relief is pursued, any consequential financial advantage arises outside the litigation and does not constitute sums recovered for DBA purposes. The judgment also demonstrates that DBAs can be an effective mechanism for funding disputes and facilitating access to justice, but careful drafting is vital to ensure compliance with the regulatory framework and to preserve enforceability. The courts are plainly reluctant to sever offending provisions within a retainer and will apply the regulations strictly, even if that produces a result that may appear unduly...

The High Court ruled earlier in September 2025 that unqualified employees cannot conduct litigation, even under the supervision of a qualified lawyer The High Court’s early September 2025 ruling bars unqualified staff from conducting litigation, even when overseen by a qualified lawyer. The move has unsettled the legality of passing litigation tasks to paralegals and trainees. Victoria Morrison- Hughes, managing director of Integral Legal Costs and vice-chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers, cautioned that the sector is gripped by significant fear, as everyday working practices could now breach the law and leave both employers and employees at risk of committing a criminal offence. She noted the impact is already being felt across the industry, with widespread and growing concern. The decision of 16 September 2025 arose from a dispute between Charles Russell Speechlys LLP and clients Julia Mazur and Jerome Stuart, after the pair failed to...

The Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) reported that KP Law Ltd, a group action claims specialist, and Glasgow-based full-service practice Jones Whyte Law Ltd, had presented misleading details in promotions inviting consumers to join compensation claims over an alleged Arnold Clark data breach. Under KP Law’s contract, clients could be responsible for costs in situations the regulator judged consumers would not reasonably anticipate. As an illustration, if a client withdrew from the agreement yet subsequently succeeded with the claim, the terms permitted KP Law to levy a success fee regardless. The ASA also found that a claim sign-up web page failed to set out KP Law’s charges and the method by which they were calculated, and omitted explanations of the scenarios in which consumers might be liable for costs in some circumstances......

Counsel for the insurer told the High Court that Novitas Loans Ltd and Am Trust have resolved their court dispute about who bears responsibility for litigation-funding arrangements linked to the lender and two now-defunct legal firms. Ben Elkington KC of 4 New Square Chambers said the change in the shape of the litigation is that Novitas’s principal claim against Am Trust has been resolved. Consequently, the dispute is now effectively pared back to the £60m claim that Am Trust has brought against Endurance Worldwide Insurance Ltd, the insurer, Elkington added......

High Court Judge Karen Steyn ordered Clarke to pay £3m towards The Guardian's legal costs within 28 days after the actor lost his libel claim against the news organisation The dispute stemmed from a series of reports alleging Clarke exploited his status to repeatedly target women. The 49-year-old, known for Doctor Who and the Kidulthood film franchise, sued Guardian News & Media Ltd over seven articles and a podcast released between April 2021 and March 2022. The initial piece alleged he was a 'sexual predator' who had abused or sexually harassed 20 women. In August, Judge Steyn found that the majority of the sexual misconduct and bullying allegations were 'substantially true'. She also determined Clarke had lied to the court and 'was not a credible or reliable witness'. On 23 September 2025, the judge ordered that costs be paid on the indemnity basis, making it...

In this issue: Key PI and clinical negligence news Clinical negligence Product liability Injuries caused by animals Psychiatric and occupational stress Other PI and clinical negligence news Lexis Nexis® PI & Clinical Negligence Quantum Database Lexis Nexis® Quantum Portal Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and clinical negligence news DHSC and NHS England launch Jess’s Rule to avoid delays in diagnosis The Department of Health and Social Care ( DHSC) and NHS England have rolled out Jess’s Rule across general practitioner ( GP) surgeries in England to cut missed or delayed diagnoses and reduce avoidable deaths. The scheme asks GPs to use a ‘three strikes and rethink approach’—reassessing their clinical judgement if, after three consultations, no firm diagnosis exists or symptoms have intensified. Jess’s Rule sets out prompts to reflect, review and rethink whenever a patient’s condition remains unclear. This could include...

HQA (by her husband and litigation friend, HQK) v Newcastle-upon- Tyne Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2025] EWHC 2121 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision serves as a useful reminder that issues of informed consent attract less dependence on expert evidence than many other aspects of clinical negligence. The assessment is specific to the individual patient, and a surgeon should not decide the patient’s appetite for risk— Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 applied. The court was especially critical of the Trust’s omission in failing to arrange an out-patient appointment for the claimant well ahead of the intended operation, so the risks and benefits of the proposed elective procedure could be explored and then considered more fully at leisure......

O' Connell v The Ministry of Defence [2025] EWHC 2301 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? The claimant did not establish liability under AA 1971, s 2(2)(a) because the judge concluded that while a serious injury was foreseeable, it was not reasonably to be expected. In this dispute the parties accepted that 'reasonably to be expected' equated to the statutory term 'likely' in AA 1971, s 2(2)(a), adopting Lord Scott’s expression in Mirvahedy v Henley [2003] UKHL 16. That approach has since been applied by the Court of Appeal in later authorities, including Turnbull v Warrener [2012] EWCA Civ 412, albeit with minimal debate on the issue. Yet Lord Scott’s remarks in Mirvahedy were in dissent, and an earlier House of Lords decision ( Smith v Ainger [1990] Lexis Citation 1779) still represents good law on the point. In Smith v...

The insurer stated that some dishonest claimants are seeking to overstate the effects of injuries excluded from a new fixed damages tariff, in a bid to secure higher pay-outs. Allianz noted this behaviour is among the drivers behind increasing fraud levels. It reported the value of fraud it prevented climbed to £92.6m in the first half of the year—a 34% rise on the £68.9m recorded in the same period in 2024. The split between so-called tariff and non-tariff injuries within a single claim stems from a landmark UK Supreme Court judgment in March 2024. The consequence of that decision still runs through combined injury claims......

How has the absence of the Recast Brussels Regulation and the Lugano Convention impacted personal injury claimants in cross border UK- EU disputes since Brexit? Before Brexit, the UK was a signatory to Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012 (‘recast Brussels’). That regime governed, alongside rules on forum, the recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments throughout the European Union as a whole. Separately, the EU, together with Switzerland, Denmark, Norway and Iceland, was also party to the 2007 Lugano Convention on jurisdiction and on recognising and enforcing civil and commercial judgments (‘the Lugano Convention’). Once the UK exited the EU, neither recast Brussels nor the Lugano Convention continued to operate for this jurisdiction. As a result, beyond pronounced questions of jurisdiction, parties to civil and commercial disputes, including those bringing personal injury actions, could no longer rely on the automatic...

News Analysis: UK product liability reform—new redress rules for AI systems? We recently discussed the likelihood of forthcoming changes to the UK product liability framework (see News Analysis: UK product liability reform—new redress rules for AI systems?), which could result in the UK’s product liability regime being brought into closer alignment with the new EU Product Liability Directive (the Revised EU PLD—see Practice Note: The Revised EU Product Liability Directive). The Law Commission has since confirmed a formal review of the UK’s product liability regime within its 14th work programme. For now, the apparent emphasis of that review is on ‘emerging technologies’, with a particular spotlight on AI......

The Public Office ( Accountability) Bill The Public Office ( Accountability) Bill, brought before Parliament by Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy on 15 September 2025, would impose a statutory obligation on public officials to co-operate candidly and comprehensively with inquests and inquiries into fatal incidents and major scandals. Its measures would place a duty on public bodies to be truthful, requiring officials to hand over information and evidence even where doing so may not serve their own interests. The Bill further creates criminal liability for officials who do not conduct themselves with honesty and integrity at all times, with prosecutions for 'especially egregious breaches' carrying sentences of up to two years in prison. Yet lawyers caution that uncertainties remain over how these provisions will operate in practice. Authorities must step forward with information, but they will still need to examine material,...

High Court judge Clive Sheldon, in a written ruling dated 16 September 2025, concluded that the legislation bars unqualified law firm staff from having conduct of litigation. He said this conflicted with guidance from the Solicitors Regulation Authority ( SRA), which had advised a firm that an unqualified employee could manage a case under a solicitor’s supervision. He explained that mere employment by someone authorised to conduct litigation does not permit the employee to do so, even if supervised. The individual actually conducting the litigation must be authorised in their own right, or fall within an exempt category. In his view, that is the correct interpretation of the act. According to the judgment, the issue arose from a dispute between Charles Russell Speechlys LLP and two clients, Julia Mazur and Jerome Stuart. When the clients failed to pay a £54,000 invoice, the firm...

Harbour’s counsel, acting for the litigation funder, asked the High Court to bar Nicholas Thomas from representing himself in the case, alleging he was covertly acting to advance the interests of his associate, Gerald Smith. In 2021, Judge David Foxton held that the Serious Fraud Office ( SFO) and other creditors were entitled to retrieve tens of millions of pounds from Smith, jailed for stealing £35m from a software company. The SFO was among multiple parties asserting claims over his realisable assets. Those claimants included beneficiaries of a 2016 settlement arising from litigation between Smith and his former business partner, Andy Ruhan. Harbour led the action on behalf of the settlement group in the proceedings before the High Court. Daniel Saoul KC of 4 New Square Chambers, for Harbour, told Judge Andrew Henshaw that Thomas had 'acted in league' with Smith to...

The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia ( Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2025] EWCA Civ 1162 What are the practical implications of this judgment? The Court of Appeal has reaffirmed that diplomatic missions cannot, as a default position, rely on state immunity to fend off employment claims. The decisive consideration is the true nature of the worker’s role. Where tasks are routine, clerical and supportive, and do not satisfy the Benkharbouche standard of being ‘sufficiently close’ to the exercise of sovereign authority, the English courts retain jurisdiction over EU-derived employment claims. Having resolved the SIA 1978, s 4 issue—reinstating the employment tribunal’s finding that the Embassy could not invoke state immunity under s 4 in respect of the claimant’s EU-derived employment claims, including discrimination—the court considered it unnecessary to determine the remaining appeal grounds on waiver of immunity and personal and/or psychiatric injury...

Hetherington v Fell and another [2025] EWHC 1487 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment has significant real-world consequences for advisers to voluntary bodies, especially within sport, regarding the existence and extent of their duty of care. The court expressly addressed the SARHA 2015 and the Com A 2006, confirming that the benchmark for volunteer-led clubs must not be pitched so high that it discourages worthwhile community participation. Accordingly, although a duty exists, liability should be approached pragmatically, recognising constrained resources and the charitable, not-for-profit character of these organisations. On risk assessment, the decision endorses qualitative grading (eg, ‘low’, ‘medium’, ‘high’) for smaller entities, instead of insisting on the detailed quantitative modelling typical of major employers. It further indicates that trivial administrative mistakes in assessment records—like misstated distances or phrasing of hazards—are unlikely to amount to a breach for...

Francis Campeau may press on with his claim for a declaration that Gottex Real Asset Fund 1 ( OE) Waste SARL relinquished its right to bring proceedings against him over what the fund alleges were negligent negotiations for the disposal of one of its portfolio companies, the High Court ruled. Judge Christopher Butcher held that Campeau was entitled to serve a claim form on Gottex outside the jurisdiction, in Luxembourg, and to do so without permission because the fund had contractually accepted that approach. According to the judgment, the share purchase agreement between Gottex and Geco Holdco Ltd, the buyer of the fund’s holding company, contained jurisdiction provisions enabling third parties to submit their disputes to the English courts......

ALK and another v The Chief Constable of Surrey Police [2025] EWHC 1964 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? ALK yields two concrete takeaways for practitioners and highlights two points for practice. First, Bourne J reaffirms the stringent threshold for the necessity of arrest under PACE 1984, s 24: courts will, among other matters, expect proof that arresting officers actively considered less intrusive measures, including whether they turned their minds to alternatives at the time. That inquiry can be determinative in itself. Engaging directly with the Parker Questions, Notes 2F and 2G to Code G, and surveying the authorities, the judgment confirms that assessing alternatives is no mere formality, but a real requirement. Practitioners should therefore ensure the evidence shows an officer’s consideration of alternatives if arrest is to be justified, whilst claimants should scrutinise any failure to do so. ...

Personal Representatives of the Estate of Maurice Hutson ( Deceased) and others v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 1594 ( SCCO) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling offers welcome certainty to practitioners and lawyers pursuing proceedings for estates. Relying on Mosson v Spousal ( London) Ltd [2016] EWHC 53 ( QB), defendants have opposed recovery of probate expenses, contending they are part and parcel of administering an estate and therefore irrecoverable. Rowley J was squarely asked to determine whether probate outlay could be recovered as litigation costs. He set a bright line: where probate is secured solely to enable the claim to be issued, those expenses are recoverable. The decision matters both for resolving a recurrent and troublesome point and, in substance, for enhancing recovery of costs for claimants, frequently modest estates. For those representing claimants, the judgment stresses the need to...