*/
Negligence – Duty to take care. The claimant lorry driver issued proceedings against his employer after suffering injury in descending the lorry's steps. The judge dismissed his claim and the claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not erred in finding that the steps had not been inherently dangerous and that no training was needed because the need to take care was obvious.
Negligence – Duty to take care. The claimant lorry driver issued proceedings against his employer after suffering injury in descending the lorry's steps. The judge dismissed his claim and the claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had not erred in finding that the steps had not been inherently dangerous and that no training was needed because the need to take care was obvious.
Philip N Bristow explains how to unlock your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step
With the property market witnessing significant changes since the beginning of the pandemic, Fleet Street Wealth’s Managing Director Julian Morgan considers the future of the home, the second home and the office
In partnership with the Bar Council, LexisNexis is offering up to 60% off its extensive webinar offering.
Chambers is expanding its team.
Making a move from the Bar to a career in governance: Maria Brookes outlines three good reasons to switch and how to do it
Making sure international justice works effectively and realising what matters Karim Khan QC, the new Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, talks to Monica Feria-Tinta
Exclusive statistical analysis: Barbara Mills QC outlines how the deeply unhelpful, homogenous BAME acronym is masking the true extent and systemic nature of the Bars diversity problem
A toolkit to help you build profile, expertise and a bright future in arbitration. By James Bridgeman
Jonathan Seitler QC and Miriam Seitler discuss Carpool Case Law, the Bar today and the business development side of the job
