Tagged: Contract Law
Why did such a doctor not read, presumably, a leading professional journal in his/her specialised field?
A plaintiff must prove the defect and damage. The fact of the DePuy “recall” is useful to prove the defect, but it would be necessary to engage an expert in the issue. The damage would vary from case to case, but it is difficult to see how any plaintiff with a DePuy hip would avoid ex-plantation before the expiration of the expected use life of the hips, 10 to 15 years.
Calculate, with the solicitor, the various periods of limitations for the various heads of claim. They are; 2 years for a claim under the Liability for Defective Products Act; 6 years for breach of contract; 2 years for negligence resulting in personal injury. Two or more of these periods are coming to an end. This is a crisis for victims who have not issued proceedings.
What are the actual relevant dates from which time is running?
For negligence claims the date is the date the woman received a letter from the clinic informing her she had PIP breast implants. For breach of contract claims the date is the day of the operation fitting the implants.
Is this a serious defect in the PIP Breast Implants?
If the breast implants do not rupture, it is probably not a problem. However, in all cases of fraud, as this one is, it is not possible to exclude the possible presence of toxic substances in the breast implants. If that is the case the problem is not just serious, it is serious and acute.
Yes, you will need a lawyer or even lawyers, if you find yourself in this kind of trouble. Lawyers, regardless of what they are doing, are doing it to earn their living, among other things. Get ready to pay for the service and remember why you needed the service in the first place.
It was also unnecessary. The burden of proof on Anglo Irish Bank was on the balance of probability. Undoubtedly its loan documentation unequivocally showed that Mrs. Quinn signed up to a loan transaction. (We can know this because of what we know about lawyers; her lawyers would have pointed out any deficiencies. From reports, they did not, therefore there were none).
Consequently, financial claims arising in contract do not all deserve to be heard in summary manner in the High court; some should go to plenary hearing with a full examination of the context in which the agreement was concluded.
To buy a house is the most significant purchase most people will make. It is the ultimate consumer purchase.
Even if the SMDF is not insolvent, it is possibly suggesting that it will not pay out on some at least of valid claims against solicitor members of the SMDF. Why do the members not top-up the “mutual fund” that is the SMDF, to meet those claims? On the figures provided by the SMDF, this would cost the members approximately €1000 per year. According to the Council of the Law Society, the prospects of them agreeing to this are “slim”, but they have not been tested.