Nadia has wide-ranging experience of personal injury litigation. Recent examples of her work are:
- pedestrians suffering catastrophic/fatal injuries in collisions with HGVs/buses: Osipov v Cemex Ltd (2018); Abbott v Red & White Services Limited (ongoing);
- motorbike/pushbike accidents: Owen v Khan (ongoing, catastrophic injuries); Lennon v Frith (2018, brain injury);
- road traffic accident claims raising issues ex turpi causa, volenti non fit injuria and contributory negligence (e.g. knowledge of driver’s alcohol consumption, partaking in a criminal enterprise, failure to wear a seatbelt);
- insurance issues, including indemnity, scope of liability of an RTA insurer (e.g. using vehicle as a weapon or for other purposes) and counter-claims against other insurers;
- claims against the MIB involving uninsured and untraced drivers;
- Gray v Botwright  EWCA Civ 1201: following the successful defence of a claim involving a Defendant crossing a junction at a red traffic light, liability was apportioned 50:50 on a 2nd appeal to the Court of Appeal.
- tripping and slipping injuries in a variety of settings such as supermarkets, school premises, bus stations, leisure centres, public piers, parks and on highways;
- issues involving snow and ice claims;
- occupiers’ liability and defective premises claims (boilers, radiators, common parts);
- injuries at sports and activities centres (climbing, trampolining, go-carting, football).
- assaults at work causing physical and psychiatric injuries (including delayed onset injuries such as cardiac arrest);
- lifting injuries in a variety of settings (nurses, builders, delivery drivers, shop and warehouse assistants, physiotherapists and undertakers);
- falls from heights in relation to employees and independent contractors;
- tripping and slipping claims at work, including at employers’ premises and premises where employees are required to attend as part of their employment (e.g. carers at service user’s homes);
- disease claims (please see Occupational Disease section).
- claims arising in the setting of Care Homes (pressure sores, choking, trips, slips and falls, failure to seek timely medical attention and assault by residents/carers);
- Inquests (including Article 2 inquests with and without a jury) arising from death in care settings;
- Nadia recently represented the family at an Inquest in front of a jury where a conclusion was returned that the deceased’s death from irreversible cerebral anoxia and upper airway obstruction was contributed to by neglect. Despite her known risk of self-harm by the use of ligatures, the deceased was permitted to wear tights, and was not subject to adequate observations.
Abuse: Nadia has been instructed in numerous cases involving the sexual, emotional and physical abuse of children and advises both the perpetrators and the victims on quantum. She is currently instructed on behalf of the Claimant in a case involving historic sexual and physical abuse which proceeds against the perpetrators of the abuse and in respect of clinical negligence on the part of doctors who failed to escalate their concerns about potential abuse of a 5 year old child suffering from genital warts.
Catastrophic injuries: cases featuring life changing spinal injuries, amputations and traumatic brain injuries. Recent experience involves a number of subtle brain injury claims raising intricate issues of capacity, future care and residual earnings.
Fatal Accident Act claims: Nadia is regularly instructed in complex claims for financial dependency. Recent examples include a range of issues:
- the deceased’s future career development (e.g. a young deceased employed as a manger alleged to be ambitious and likely to progress to the Board of Directors);
- the application of section 4 of the Fatal Accident Act 1976 to various sources of income existing at the time of death and paid to the deceased’s estate thereafter;
- the recoverability of costs of IVF where fertilised embryos are in existence at the time of death;
- appropriate care regime for a large family of orphaned children following premature death of a single mother.
Chronic pain: cases where an apparently minor accident has resulted in complaints of significant ongoing disability with potential issues of exaggeration or malingering.
Conversion disorders: cases of non-organic injuries (e.g. blindness, inability to use the right hand, abdominal pain) mediated by a psychiatric condition where a line needs to be drawn between potential malingering and a genuine psychiatric condition, complicating issues of causation and prognosis.
Fraud: Nadia’s experience in dealing with alleged fraud includes:
- in the context of road traffic accidents including staged and semi-staged accidents, LVI, phantom passengers;
- holiday sickness claims;
- exaggeration, malingering and fundamental dishonesty in the context of disapplication of QOWCS and under section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
- Noise-induced hearing loss: alleged exposure from 1960s; de minimis loss; low fence threshold arguments; asymmetric hearing loss; moderate tinnitus with minimal hearing loss; tinnitus alone in the context of claims by former BT engineers and auditory trauma, both instantaneous and cumulative.
- Asbestos-related conditions: mesothelioma; lung cancer; asbestosis; diffuse pleural thickening.
- Upper limb disorders: lateral and medial epicondylitis; HAVS; carpal tunnel syndrome; rotator cuff pathology.
- Other diseases: dermatitis; botryomycosis; actinomycosis; abscesses; bird fancier’s lung.
- Nadia Whittaker helps MPS to secure a finding that the QOCS protection does not apply to pre-action applications, resulting in Cleversons Solicitors acting for the Claimants agreeing to meet all costs orders
- Nadia Whittaker successfully defends an application for a GLO
- Princess Royal Scholar & Exhibitioner, Inner Temple
- LLB (First Class), College of Law (2007)
- BVC (Outstanding), College of Law (2006 – 2007)
- GDL (Distinction), College of Law (2004 – 2006)
- MA in Medical Law & Ethics (Merit), King’s College London (2002 – 2004)
- BSc in Psychology (First Class), Westminster University (1999 – 2002)
“Nadia is an extremely bright, tenacious advocate who brings real force to legal argument, particularly for maximising outcomes in negotiations. Adopts a thorough, robust and forensic approach to the law.”
Legal 500, 2021