If you'd like to contact us or contribute email us today|editors@pro-vide-law.co.uk

charlesfeeny

/Charles Feeny

About Charles Feeny

Charles undertakes work in the areas of clinical negligence, industrial disease, personal injury & health, safety and regulatory work. If you would like to contact Charles please email: charles.feeny@completecounsel.co.uk

RSA v GENERALI – LIFE IN THE ENCLAVE?

By |May 21st, 2018|Case Notes, Industrial Disease|

HHJ Brian Rawlings on 15thMay 2018 handed down judgement in this case. Michael Kent QC and Peter Houghton instructed by Plexus appeared for the Claimant; Charles Feeny, instructed by Hill Dickinson appeared for the Defendant.  Mr Merritt worked for a painting and decorating company (Alick Whittle Limited) between 1975 and 1985, during which time he [...]

2018 Social History of Medicine Conference

By |March 6th, 2018|Events|

Charles Feeny has been invited to speak at the 2018 Social History of Medicine Conference “Conformity, Resistance Dialogue and Deviance in Health and Medicine” at the University of Liverpool in July 2018. Charles Feeny will be participating in a round table discussion on Primodos chaired by Jesse Olszynko-Gryn of the University of Cambridge. Primodos was [...]

BUSSEY v ANGLIA HEATING: COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS CLAIMANT’S PER INCURIAM ARGUMENT

By |February 22nd, 2018|Case Notes, Industrial Disease|

The original article can be found here On 22 February ,the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the case of Bussey v Anglia Heating. The primary focus of the Claimant’s Appeal had been that the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal in Williams v The University of Birmingham was per incuriam and therefore [...]

Contribution and Apportionment: Unruly Horses? An article by Charles Feeny and Sam Irving for PI Brief Update Law Journal

By |February 15th, 2018|Articles|

25/01/18. "Public policy is a very unruly horse, and when once you get astride, you never know where it will carry you." These oft repeated words were those of Borough J in Richardson v. Mellish in 1824 and are the first reference to the much repeated maxim, that resorting to public policy is equivalent to mounting [...]

XX V WHITTINGTON – Knowing when to return?

By |October 17th, 2017|Case Notes, Clinical Negligence|

Sir Robert Nelson on 18th September handed down judgement in this case. Claire Watson instructed by Irwin Mitchell LLP appeared for the Claimant; Charles Feeny, instructed by Bevan Brittan LLP appeared for the Defendant.  XX attended smear tests administered by doctors working for the Defendant in 2008 and 2012, and subsequently attended biopsies in 2012 [...]

WHEATCROFT v BRINE – Liability to ‘smartphone zombies’?

By |September 19th, 2017|Case Notes, Personal Injury|

His Honour Judge Main QC on 11th May 2017 handed down judgement in this case at Manchester County Court. David Sandiford, instructed by Irwin Mitchell, appeared for the Claimant; Charles Feeney, instructed by Keoghs, appeared for the Defendant. At approximately 12.10 pm on 24th December 2013 Ms. Chloe Wheatcroft, the then 14-year old Claimant, was [...]

BUSSEY v. ANGLIA HEATING – Withstanding the broadsides?

By |May 16th, 2017|Case Notes, Industrial Disease|

His Honour Judge Yelton on 12th May 2017 handed down judgment in this case.  The action was a fatal mesothelioma claim.  The deceased, Mr Bussey, was employed by the Defendants as a plumber carrying out predominantly domestic work in the period 1965 to 1968.  In particular, Mr Bussey worked on the installation of new boilers [...]

PD v RLBUH NHS T (2016) – Reasonable Reconstruction or Speculation in Surgical Negligence?

By |March 23rd, 2017|Case Notes, Clinical Negligence|

Facts: On 11thNovember 2010 the claimant, Mr PD, underwent a laparoscopic subtotal colectomy and end ileostomy, which involved removal of the colon and diversion of the small bowel to an opening in the stomach. Following the procedure it emerged that the claimant had suffered an intraperitoneal haemorrhage to the bowel during the first surgery, and [...]

McGeer v McIntosh: Paving a safer way for cyclists? (Number 2)

By |February 28th, 2017|Case Notes, Personal Injury|

The Court of Appeal have dismissed the Defendant’s appeal against the judgement of His Honour Judge Raynor QC awarding the Claimant 70% of damages on a full liability basis. We previously discussed the implications of the first instance judgment in McGeer v McIntosh: Paving a safer way for cyclists? The appeal sought to challenge the [...]

Reaney – the yet to be resolved questions

By |December 6th, 2016|Articles|

Reaney – the yet to be resolved questions The case of Christine Reaney v. University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust (1) and Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust (2)[1] has now compromised on a largely pragmatic basis, reflecting both parties' perception of the risks in proceeding. These risks were increased by Mr Justice Foskett's understandable [...]