Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 2000 |
| 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
10 cases
-
AB & Others v Ministry of Defence
...the Eli Lilly case, cited above, by contrast, the Court of Appeal, in a passage at 795H–796A cited with approval by Judge LJ in Sniezek & Bundy (Letchworth) Ltd [2000] PIQR P213 at P228, observed that it had "difficulty in perceiving how in any case where a claimant has sought advice and t......
-
Gough v Neary & Cronin
...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 (UK) MIRZA V BIRMINGHAM HEALTH AUTHORITY UNREP EADY 31.7.2001 QBD ROWBOTTOM V MASONIC HOSPITAL 65 BMLR 103 ......
-
John Aitchison V. Glasgow City Council
...Authority [1994] 1 WLR 1234, per Sir Thomas Bingham MR at page 1240). Reference was also made to Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Ltd [2000] PIQR P 213, especially per Judge LJ at pages 231-2. The "injuries in question" envisaged that there were (or might be) other injuries which were not in qu......
-
AB & Others v Ministry of Defence
...Nash v Eli Lilly & Co [1993] 1 WLR 782 at 797–8. 90 At paragraph 523, the judge noted the proposition, which he derived from Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited [2000] PIQR P213 that a firm belief in the attributability of a condition to the acts or omissions in question (even though not......
Request a trial to view additional results