Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 March 1996 |
| Date | 14 March 1996 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
102 cases
-
McGhie v British Telecommunications Plc
...that it is relevant to consider the strength of Mr McGhie's case. Mr Leech refers to another judgment of Stuart-Smith LJ in Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority [1997] QB 402, the passage being at 417–418. Stuart-Smith LJ there said that a relevant consideration to the exercise of the discr......
-
O'Sullivan v Ireland, the Attorney General
...which was reasonably available and which would have shown that nerve damage had been caused. In Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority [1997] QB 402, the plaintiff had a leg amputated. Time did not begin to run from that event but, instead, from the time when he had reasonably obtained exper......
-
Gough v Neary & Cronin
...LIMITATIONS (AMDT) ACT 1991 S2(1)(A) LIMITATION ACT 1975 (UK) NASH V ELI LILLY & CO 1993 1 WLR 782 FORBES V WANDWORTH HEALTH AUTHORITY 1996 3 WLR 1108 SPARGO V NORTH ESSEX DISTRICT HEALTH AUTHORITY 37 BMLR 99 SNIEZEK V BUNDY (LETCHWORTH) LTD [2000] PIQR 213 CHAPLIN V MOSS UNREP 17.7.2001 ......
-
Kew v Bettamix Ltd and Others
...plaintiff must be assumed to be a person who has suffered the injury in question and not some other person. But, like Roch LJ in Forbes [1997] QB 402, 425 I do not see how his particular character or intelligence can be relevant. In my opinion, section 14(3) requires one to assume that a pe......
Request a trial to view additional results