Case Studies From Our Liverpool Solicitors

When N went to a different salon from normal for an eyebrow wax and tint, the beautician failed to carry out any skin patch or allergy tests before the £11 treatment. The following morning her eyes were swollen and closed and her forehead felt swollen. Her upper eyelids were weeping a yellow discharge and she also had weeping pustules in her eyebrows. She bathed the areas in boiled water and saw her GP two days later.

The affected skin remained itchy, sore and scabbed for the next two weeks and N continued to suffer continuing problems with her eyebrows from that point onwards. Before approaching EAD Solicitors, N went back to the salon to complain and, although one member of staff confirmed that they had recently 'changed their products', the manager refused to do anything.

EAD Solicitors arranged for N to be examined by a consultant dermatologist, who diagnosed acute contact dermatitis caused by hair colorant. N had been having eyebrow wax and tints regularly - three or four times every year - and had only ever had one previous allergic reaction, when a friend had waxed her eyebrows. Then, overheating the wax had resulted in just one eyebrow area reacting. However, the salon refused to settle because of this, so EAD began court proceedings.

Happily, EAD was able to settle the claim before the hearing took place and N received more than £2,700 in compensation.

Claimant tripped and fell due to an uneven paving stone. As a result of the accident, the Claimant sustained an injury to her knee which required surgery. The Local Authority admitted negligence and breach of statutory duty. Damages were agreed between the parties in the sum of £5,000.

Accident Compensation Claim Liverpool

Our client was an elderly lady who fell when she stood on a rocking paving stone and sustained a serious injury to her arm. Her elbow was fractured and she required surgery. An accident compensation claim was brought against the Local Authority who defended the claim. Following the Hearing, the Judge found in the Claimant's favour and awarded her the sum of £16,000.

Personal Injury

A young girl of 13 years of age was walking along the street at night, when she fell into a workman's hole which had been left partially uncovered. As a result of the accident, the client suffered a laceration to her thigh and was left with a scar. The construction company admitted liability and the Claimant was awarded the sum of £3,500.

Personal Injury

A 60 year old client slipped on ice which had formed in her backyard due to a leaking overflow pipe and she sustained a fracture dislocation to her elbow. The personal injury claim which was initially defended by the Housing Association eventually settled out of Court and the Claimant received the sum of £16,000

Personal Injury

Aiding a client in pursuing a claim for compensation for a brain injury from birth. After he had been told they had no case by another firm, EAD pursued the claim to the High Court winning £2.1 million to provide care for him for the rest of his life.

Medical Negligence

Obtaining £150,000 compensation for the family of a small boy whose GP failed to diagnose meningitis, causing him and his family a great deal of distress.

Medical Negligence

Action against a GP for their failure to diagnose malaria in a patient, resulting in her death. Compensation was obtained for her husband and the Department of Health made to act accordingly to help prevent this happening again.

Medical Negligence

Obtaining compensation, acceptance of responsibility and an apology from a regional Hospital NHS Trust after client was given an inappropriate and badly performed operation.

Medical Negligence

Acting for a client who suffered terrible injuries in a road traffic accident. Although the accident was not her fault, she was told by insurers that she was not automatically entitled to make a claim for car accident compensation. EAD Solicitors LLP ensured that insurers paid £150,000 in compensation to the victim.

Road Traffic Accidents

Acting in a case for a Claimant in which the Defendants were running an argument of low speed, no injury. Defendant sought leave to bring in expert engineering evidence. Matter heard at the Court and the Defendants Application to have engineering evidence adduced was defeated.

Road Traffic Accidents

Acting for a pedestrian injured in a very serious road traffic accident whilst crossing the road. The Defendant made no offers on liability and the matter proceeded fully to trial in the High Court and the Claimant received in excess of £400,000.

Road Traffic Accidents

Acting for a client in which the insurers alleged low speed impact causing no injury. The matter proceeded to Trial. The Claimant was 100% successful and the Defendant's argument of low speed, no injury defeated.

Road Traffic Accidents

£1.6 million settlement for a 59 year old woman who suffered serious head injuries in a road traffic accident. Claimant was hit by an uninsured motorist who denied liability.

Road Traffic Accidents

Four former employees of a North Wales engineering company which closed in 2003 suffered industrial deafness. EAD recovered substantial damages on behalf of these clients.

Accidents at Work

A 52 year old union member sustained an injury at work to his right dominant wrist. As a result of this accident he was required to undergo two operations to repair tendon damage. He was unable to return to his job and received £80,000.00.

Accidents at Work

A man employed by a security company was assaulted during the course of his employment. A successful claim was made against the employers and EAD obtained a settlement of £8,500 on behalf of the client.

Accidents at Work

A GMB union member fell from scaffolding and sustained numerous orthopaedic injuries, including a fractured skull. EAD Solicitors ensured the claimant received £75,000.00.

Accidents at Work

£375,000 for 45 year old woman who injured her right hand in a fall at work. This case was bitterly contested by the Defendants and listed for trial in the High Court but using Mediation was resolved to the satisfaction of both parties.

Accidents at Work

Andrew Hesketh from our Trade Union/Personal Injury department was able to successfully conclude a claim for one of our Union clients recently, in spite of an opinion from an expert engineer who was of the view that the Defendant company, the client's employer, should not be held liable for the accident.

The Claimant was a member of Unite the Union and worked for the Defendant company as a Press Setter. He was injured whilst changing a tool on a hydraulic press situated in the Defendant's factory premises.

The tool in question was in two parts, comprising of an upper and a lower part, with pressure plates sat on top of each of these parts. After fixing the tooling in place he was then required to lift the upper part of the tool within the machine as part of the setting process. But, when the upper part of the tool was lifted, the pressure plate from the lower part of the tooling stuck to the upper pressure plate, due to the presence of thin, sticky oil that had been placed on the surface of each.

However, after the upper tooling had been lifted only a short distance the lower pressure plate came loose and fell on to the Claimant's hand causing a nasty injury to his thumb in particular.

Liability for this accident was denied by the Defendant's insurers as they argued that they could not have foreseen that the oil would cause the pressure plates to stick together and, therefore, could not have foreseen that such an accident would occur. This was disputed by the Claimant and so an expert engineer was instructed by both parties to comment upon the issue following a site inspection.

The engineer produced a report in which he supported the Defendant company, stating that unless there had been any previous, similar incidents (for which there was no evidence) he did not see how the Defendant could have foreseen such an accident or assess the level of risk arising from such an accident.

The Defendants were therefore of the view that this evidence meant that the claim could go no further and that they could not be held liable for the injuries sustained by the Claimant.

However, a detailed review of the claim and the relevant Health & Safety legislation in this area led us to form the opinion that, regardless of the engineer's conclusions, the claim should still succeed.

Regulation 12 (1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states that "every employer shall take measures to ensure that the exposure of the person using work equipment to any risk to his health or safety from any hazard specified in paragraph (3) is either prevented, or, where that is not reasonably practicable, adequately controlled."

Paragraph 3 goes on to describe one of the hazards referred to above as, "any article or substance falling or being ejected from work equipment".

We were therefore of the view that this regulation posed an absolute duty on the Defendant in this case, which could not be avoided by arguments of foreseeability.

The engineer had stated within his report that the accident could have been prevented by the fitting of a set of sliding brackets, pins or chains, and so we were of the view that this was a measure that could have "adequately controlled" the potential risk, and that Regulation (1) should therefore apply - meaning that the claim could still succeed regardless of the engineer's final conclusions regarding foreseeability.

Court proceedings were therefore issued and EAD were eventually proved to be correct, with the claim eventually being concluded in favour of the Claimant.

'Operation Blossom' Global Software Piracy on a massive scale. First case prosecuted by the (then) National Hi Tech Crime Unit based in Docklands. Case involved a 'warez' group 'DrinkOrDie' whose hierarchy caused a vast amount of software to have its privacy protections 'cracked', including Microsoft Windows, and placed on a website so that group members and others could use these products for free. 100+ arrests executed worldwide co-ordinated by the US Department of Justice. Advised and assisted a Defendant in respect of foreign jurisdiction inquiries in various US jurisdictions and in Australia.

Criminal Defence

Liverpool Crown Court Acting for a Defendant charged in Money Laundering and confiscation proceedings assisting client to defeat a claim for confiscation in excess of £250,000.

Criminal Defence

'Operation Predator' - Birmingham/Derby Crown Court High value, drugs related confiscation matter. Successfully defeating the Crown's money laundering allegation in respect of a sum in excess of £200,000 to disappear from the benefit figure in the confiscation proceedings.

Criminal Defence

'Operation Mastery' Birmingham Crown Court - £5.5 million confiscation case following importation of 6 metric tonnes + of cannabis.

Criminal Defence

'Operation Granada' PAYE/Gift Aid fraud on HMRC as well as allegation of theft of £1million + from a children's charity designed to assist children with brain damage. The matter proceeded to a contested trial and confiscation proceedings at Manchester Crown Court. Prosecution sought a "Benefit" figure in excess of £1million. Successfully argued for a nil benefit in respect of the Defendant's admitted role in respect of the PAYE fraud and restricted her benefit to a fraction of the figure sought by the Crown.

Criminal Defence

Southwark Crown Court 'The Millennium Dome Fraud.' Large scale conspiracy to defraud, contract procurement fraud and international money laundering at the Millennium Dome. Further allegations of public sector allegations of corruption, namely the offer to award a contract for money. Investigations in Florida, Spain, Latvia and Switzerland Defendant acquitted after lengthy trial at Southwark Crown Court.

Criminal Defence

When a Company is proposing to make 30 or more people redundant from one particular workplace, there are strict regulations in place that say the Company must enter into at least 30 days consultation with the workforce, or a trade union if one is recognised. The purpose of the consultation is to try and find alternatives to redundancy if possible and to keep people fully updated about the possibility of job losses and how they will come about.

We acted for the GMB in a case against HJ Berrys & Sons Ltd, a Company based in Chipping, Lancashire. The Company manufactured furniture and had been in financial trouble for some time. They had been featured in a Channel 4 documentary in 2009 when they were offered a £1m rescue package by renowned businessman Sir Gerry Robinson that they rejected. In February 2010 the Company announced that they had gone into administration and as a result the factory had to close immediately with the loss of over 80 jobs.

We issued proceedings against the Company and they were defended by the administrators. At a recent hearing at the Manchester Tribunal, the administrators tried to argue that because the Union knew the Company were in financial trouble and had informed them of that fact, this amounted to consultation about the redundancies. The Union disagreed strongly arguing that the consultation requirements are clearly set out in the relevant legislation and there was no semblance of compliance with those requirements.

The Tribunal agreed with the Union and awarded every employee dismissed as redundant 90 days pay, the maximum they could award. This case illustrates the importance of complying with the consultation requirements and the fact that the Company had gone into administration was irrelevant. Whilst the administration means it is unlikely the ex-employees will receive the full amount owed, the Government's Redundancy Payments Office will pay for 56 of the 90 days owed. The remainder will be paid after the Company's remaining assests have been liquidated, and the administrator admitted during the course of the hearing that he expected the overall cost to the Company to be in the region of £400,000.