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

Association versus causation: epidemiology versus the law? Part II

By |2019-11-24T18:32:22+00:00November 18th, 2019|Articles|

Pro-Vide Law will be hosting a follow up event to the Seminar at Wadham College Oxford on 11th July. The seminar in July was well received by those who attended.  A quite excellent seminar today at Wadham College, Oxford, on Epidemiology and causation with some seriously impressive speakers. Thank you.  The speakers were all hugely [...]

Association v.Causation: Epidemiology v. the Law?

By |2019-11-12T13:10:37+00:00November 12th, 2019|Events|

Thursday 6th February 2020 Venue: DWF 20 Fenchurch Street, London, EC3M 3AG Time: 4pm – 7pm RSVP emma.wall@completecounsel.co.uk Following the successful seminar at Wadham College in July, a follow up event has now been arranged. DWF have kindly agreed to host this event at their London office at Fenchurch Street on 6th February 2020 commencing [...]

RSA v Bothnia – Conceding the Frame?

By |2019-05-02T11:46:51+00:00March 21st, 2019|Case Notes|

Conceding the frame? On 8th March, the Court of Appeal made an Order by Consent dismissing the Claimant's Appeal against the judgment of His Honour Judge Brian Rawlings (https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2018/1237.html). The circumstances in which this Order was made are a little surprising in that on 7th February the Court of Appeal (Eleanor King, Simon, [...]

IMMUNOTHERAPY COSTS: FINDING THE RIGHT REMEDY IN MEDICINE AND LAW?

By |2019-05-02T11:46:51+00:00September 11th, 2018|Case Notes, Employment|

The proposition that a defendant or insurer liable for terminal illness should pay reasonable treatment costs which have a prospect of improving the victim’s length or quality of life would appear to be an unlikely source of controversy.  However, it is a testament to the enduring ability of mesothelioma claims to create forensic controversy that [...]

RSA v GENERALI – LIFE IN THE ENCLAVE?

By |2019-05-02T11:46:51+00:00May 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 |2019-05-02T11:46:51+00:00March 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 |2019-05-02T11:46:52+00:00February 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 |2019-05-02T11:46:52+00:00February 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 |2019-05-02T11:46:52+00:00October 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 |2019-05-02T11:46:52+00:00September 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 [...]