Jack acts for both claimants and defendants in a wide range of personal injury cases, often in cases raising complex questions of causation or quantification of loss, and cases where there are allegations or suspicions of malingering. He regularly handles cases of catastrophic injury of the highest value and those entailing expert evidence in multiple medical and other disciplines. He is noted for his ability to marshal large volumes of evidence and to communicate on an informed level with expert witnesses in highly specialised areas. He has considerable experience of cases which turn on the subtle differences of opinion between expert witnesses, and where detailed advice on expert evidence is needed. Equally, he has an impressive track record in Court in probing the evidence of witnesses of fact.
Jack’s experience covers both trial and interim hearings, including substantial experience of costs budgeting in high value cases. He handles claims from road accidents and accidents at work to fatal accident claims and industrial diseases. He is regularly instructed in cases involving serious head injuries, psychiatric injury, somatoform disorders, fibromyalgia, chronic pain syndromes and complex regional pain syndromes. His cases regularly involve the drafting of detailed schedules and counter schedules of loss, often involving intricate calculations including claims for loss of a chance, pension loss, and claims raising issues regarding the incidence of welfare benefits.
- Kenny v Hutchins – Represented defendant at assessment of damages trial on a case where claimant made a substantial loss of profits claim arising from downturn in business allegedly due to claimant’s absence from work. Case involved highly complex forensic accountancy evidence regarding the profitability of a new business. Successfully argued that loss of profit should be assessed at nil.
- Brown v Handscombe – Acted for claimant who suffered life-changing injury at a young age after being run over. Liability was admitted but quantum assessment complicated by disputes over the claimant’s likely career path in the absence of the accident, the nature of the claimant’s ongoing cognitive impairments and as to his capacity to conduct the litigation and to manage an award of damages. A complex scheme of lifelong commercial care and therapies required to be costed in detail. Case settled at round table meeting.
- Smith v Asda – Acted for defendant in claim arising from accident at work where it was argued that the claimant had been acting recklessly, but claimant alleged lack of supervision and training. Successfully persuaded trial judge that claimant was dishonest.
- Mete et al v AXA et al – Successfully represented claimant at preliminary issue trial relating to whether a direct right of action against motor insurers exists in a case where the claimant alleges personal injury arising from a road accident but the insurer of the driver at fault withdraws liability under the policy. Later represented four separate claimants in three-week trial in consecutive cases arising from road traffic accidents where Defendant insurers argued that the claims were part of a network of fraudulent claims linking groups of Turkish/Kurdish claimants and Romanian insured parties. Challenging trial involving witnesses with poor communication skills giving evidence through interpreters and facing allegations of dishonesty.
- McHardy v Doherty – Acted for claimant suffering severe brain injuries and hemiplegia in a motorcycle accident occurring in France. Case raised finely balanced issues of mental capacity. Quantum issues complicated by defendant insurer not being a secure provider for a periodical payments award.
- Mann v Eastern Air Executive – Acting for defendant in case following accident at work where claimant sustained severe facial injuries complicated by illness behaviour and somatic pain. Case ongoing – raises complex issues of causation and the balance between conscious and unconscious exaggeration of symptoms.
- Karapetianas v Kent & Sussex Loft Conversions – Acting for defendant in case where claimant alleges complex regional pain syndrome arising from minor injury. Case involves expert evidence in multiple disciplines and allegations of malingering. Mediation pending.
- MD v AN – Acted for charitable institution defending allegations of harassment by a member of staff leading to psychiatric injury. Case raised issues as to vicarious liability for actions of holders of honorary academic positions employed by external bodies, as well as extensive factual disputes. Case reached negotiated settlement despite high level of antagonism between the parties involved.
- Khan v Glynwed Foundries – Acted for claimant in claim for lung cancer arising from prolonged exposure to silica dust during work in foundry in the 1960s and 1970s. Case raised controversial issues on causation of the disease (the claimant was a smoker) and on what the claimant’s life expectancy would have been but for the cancer.
- Scott v Bridon – Acted for defendant in claim for noise-induced hearing loss where causation was in dispute. The issues on the expert evidence centred on the significance of asymmetrical loss between the two ears, the identification of the proper percentile for evaluating the claimant’s non-noise related hearing loss, and the effect of measurement error in audiometric testing. The case involved a detailed consideration of the diagnostic guidelines contained in the seminal paper by Coles, Lutman and Buffin, and subsequent research, which calls those guidelines into question.
- Neatby v Fixtop – Represented claimant at trial in noise-induced hearing loss claim involving issues as to breach of duty, causation and limitation. The claim was complex evidentially because of the absence of documentation and the poor recollection of witnesses as to working conditions many decades earlier.
- Cousins v British & Commonwealth Holdings – Represented claimant in a claim for noise-induced hearing loss sustained while serving on board ships in the Merchant Navy. Case raised issues of breach of duty and causation, as well as conflict of law issues.
- Carr v Sir Lindsay Parkinson – Represented defendant in fatal accident claim for mesothelioma brought against former employer. The deceased held a variety of jobs in the construction industry entailing asbestos exposure in the 1950s and 1960s, but due to evidential difficulties, the claimant only directly pursued one defendant. Defendant settled the claimant’s claim and went on to bring contribution claim against another former employer of the deceased.
- Lee v Bovis – Acted for defendant in mesothelioma claim brought after expiry of primary limitation period. Issues related to whether the Court would exercise its discretion to allow the claim to proceed despite the delay in issuing proceedings.
- Pilkington v Mirahan – Represented defendant in a claim for occupational dermatitis raising issues as to causation of the disease.
- Use of surveillance evidence in personal injury claims
- AB (a child) v Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust
- London Common Law & Commercial Bar Association (1999 to present)
- Committee member of the Bar Human Rights Committee (2002 to present)