Login Join Us
Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB)

Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB)

The case involved the question of whether the claimants should have permission to call expert security evidence.
Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation

Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee is consulting on proposed changes to the Civil Procedure Rules to ensure that courts consider alterative...
Expert evidence and an absent defendant Expert evidence and an absent defendant

Expert evidence and an absent defendant

A defendant who chose not to attend or be represented at trial, suggested that he might still instruct his expert witness to provide oral...
EWI welcomes government action on unregulated expert witnesses EWI welcomes government action on unregulated expert witnesses

EWI welcomes government action on unregulated expert witnesses

In a Parliamentary debate, Lord Bellamy, a Minister of Justice, noted the neeed for the Family Procedure Rule Comitttee to develop a...
A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and... A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

EWI Honorary Fellow Tony Saggers has been a drug trafficking Expert Witness since 1995, alongside a career in law enforcement that spanned 30 years....
Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

News

North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) [2022] EWCOP 15
Priya Vaidya
/ Categories: Case Updates

North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) [2022] EWCOP 15

The case: The North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group applied for an order that it was in the best interests of E to receive Covid-19 vaccinations. E is a man in his mid-60's who has moderate to severe learning disability which has for many years been presumed to be due to organic brain damage following the administration of the whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine in infancy. There was no dispute that he lacked capacity to make decisions for himself about whether or not to receive Covid-19 vaccinations because of an impairment of, or disturbance in the function of, the mind or brain. One of his siblings, F, the second respondent, strongly opposed the application and sought to adduce the evidence of Dr Eccles.

 

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Previous Article B (A Child), Re (Adequacy of Reasons) [2022] EWCA Civ 407
Next Article Commscope Technologies LLC v SOLiD Technologies, Inc [2022] EWHC 769 (Pat)
Print
640
Comments are only visible to subscribers.