Jim Hester is once again taking on the 100km in June challenge to raise funds for Day One Trauma Support, the UK’s only national charity that provides vital early intervention to individuals and families in the immediate aftermath of catastrophic injury. The charity receives no NHS or Government funding, relying entirely on public donations.

Part 1: A Practical Guide to Diagnosis and Quantification in M-NIHL Claims in the Post-Coles Era

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) released its workplace health and safety statistics for Great Britain, covering the 2024/ 25 period.

The Court treated witness recollections with caution, preferring contemporary evidence, in this 2014 road traffic case.

Fundamental Dishonesty Allegation Dismissed – but with cost consequences.

Over the summer, figures were released regarding common law compensation claims faced by the Ministry of Defence in financial year 2023/24. The headline was that 23,797 new claims were brought in 2023/24, a startling 245% increase on the previous year.

The latest Legal 500 rankings were published on 1st October 2025 and sees Jim Hester ranked as a leading personal injury barrister on the North Eastern circuit.

(Tingming Shi, Hai Zhang, and Ming Zhao) - Editorial, Thorax, July 2025 (Thorax is the BMJ’s journal for Respiratory Physicians)

Jim Hester has authored a new case analysis for LexisNexis, examining the recent Senior Courts Costs Office decision in Personal Representatives of the Estate of Maurice Hutson (Deceased) and others v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 1594 (SCCO).

In the personal injury sector, there is a modest but growing rise in silicosis claims and cases in the UK, driven by an increased awareness, media coverage, and, most notable, the emergence of cases linked to artificial (engineered) stone worktops.

Jim Hester is once again taking on 100k in June to raise funds for Day One Trauma Support.

Personal injury—occupational injury, acoustic shock (Bevan v Ministry of Defence)

Case Note: Bevan v Ministry of Defence [2025] EWHC 1145 (KB) | Jim Hester and Georgia Banks, Counsel for the Defendant

Mrs Justice Cutts, on appeal from HHJ Duddridge. This case involves an appeal by the Claimant against a first instance decision that found him one-third contributory negligent for an accident that occurred on a building site where he was working in 2018.

A recent article by Dr Christopher Barber in Thorax highlights the emergence of artificial stone (AS) silicosis in the UK, the serious occupational lung disease that has already had significant impact on workers in Australia and other parts of the world. The article provides a helpful, if stark, reminder that history is in danger of repeating itself, as silicosis - a disease known of for thousands of years - continues to impact lives despite modern workplace protections.

In the October 2024 edition of Thorax a short case study was presented which set out the first 8 medically reported cases of silicosis due to artificial stone (AS) in the UK.

Read on for details on how to access Jim's article and book a place to join his APIL webinars.

HHJ Picton, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court

According to the most recent release of HSE statistics (late 2024), noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) remains a significant occupational hazard across Great Britain -at least if the figures from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) are to be considered.

Per HHJ Freedman, Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Registry, 24 July 2024

Experienced occupational disease practitioners will be well aware of the dangers of noise exposure for orchestral musicians with Goldscheider v Royal Opera House [2019] EWCA Civ 711 remaining fresh in the memory.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has released its 2024 statistics on workplace health and safety in Great Britain, providing an interesting (if somewhat bleak) overview of the current state of the workplace.

Jim Hester’s rankings in the 2025 Chambers & Partners and Legal 500 Directories have been released, recognising his expertise in personal injury law.

That hearing can be damaged as a result of excessive levels of noise is not a recent phenomenon. Noise induced hearing loss has long been associated with traditional industries such as shipbuilding and coal-mining, amongst many others.

Judge: Mrs. Justice Jefford DBE

Judges: Lord Hodge (Deputy President), Lord Briggs, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows, Lady Simler

High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division, 31 July 2024 per Mr Justice Garnham and Master Davison

This clinical negligence claim was brought by the widow and executrix of the estate of Mr Laurence Shaw, against Dr Maguire, a consultant pathologist. It was alleged that Dr Maguire negligently misdiagnosed malignant melanoma as benign in 2007, which ultimately led to the deceased's death in 2014.

In August 2018, the Claimant sustained severe spinal injuries while surfing at an artificial wave lagoon operated by Adventure Parc Snowdonia. He fell and struck his neck on the shallow lagoon floor, which he argued was inadequately safe.

The latest report on work-related fatal injuries in Great Britain for 2023/24 is out, and it offers some sobering (although sadly not surprising) insights.

There has been a flurry of judicial decisions in recent months where personal injury claims have been struck out based on a finding of fundamental dishonesty under s57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act.

The recently released HSE report on mesothelioma statistics for Great Britain 2024 presents an overview of the impact of mesothelioma, including recent mortality trends, demographic insights, and projections for future cases.

In this article featured in the Solicitors Journal, I unpick the ruling in Kirsty Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Limited [2024] EWHC 806 (KB) which relates the issue of ‘substantial injustice’ in case law in relation to ‘fundamentally dishonest’ claims.

For his latest case analysis, Jim Hester considers the decision in Colizzi v Coulson and UK Insurance Ltd [2024] EWHC 1956 (KB), a case involving a pedestrian claimant who was seriously injured after being struck by a vehicle.

The Claimant sustained injuries as a result of a fall in a car park adjacent to the Defendant’s Waitrose store in Ruislip in May 2015, as he returned to his car following shopping in the store. He hit his head and sustained multiple injuries with long-term effects. The claim was that the Defendant breached its duty of care under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 by failing to ensure the safety of the car park area.

Leading Judgment per Andrews LJ, with whom Jackson LJ and Arnold LJ agreed.

The Claimant had been involved in a RTA sustaining complex and life-changing injuries, most notably a severe traumatic brain injury. As a result, the Claimant suffered from cognitive and physical impairments. She will not be able to work again.

The leading Judgment was delivered by Coulson LJ with the Lady Chief Justice and Asplin LJ agreeing. This was a second appeal, a first appeal having been refused by Smith J.

Case analysis of the 9 key findings in this mesothelioma case caused by exposure to asbestos.

Personal injury practitioners will no doubt have received their 17th version of the Judicial College Guidelines or seen the updated edition via legal databases.

This interesting article by Clare Wilson suggests that further treatment for hearing loss and tinnitus may be on its way. Indeed, it may be that the two conditions have a common course which may lead to a common treatment.

Tyers v Aegis Defence Services (BVI) Limited and Ors [2023] EWHC 896 (KB), High Court, Spencer J

In my latest article, published in the Solicitors Journal on 5th June 2024, I dissect the decision in the conjoined appeal of White v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Cuthbert v Taylor Woodrow [2024] EWCA Civ 244 which deals with the duty of employers to protect their employees from the dangers of asbestos.

Like many fellow personal injury solicitors and barristers, I’m delighted to be supporting Day One Trauma’s “100k in June” challenge to raise all-important funds to help with their amazing work.

This is my last article on the new (16th Edition) of the Judicial College guidelines, following earlier articles on Work-related Limb Disorders and Noise Induced Hearing Loss.

Following my earlier article concerning Work-related Limb Disorders, this article concentrates on changes relevant for assessing damages for Noise Induced Hearing Loss under the 16th Edition of the JC Guidelines.

The standard expected of a reasonable and prudent employer in employer liability cases is frequently the subject of both legal and factual dispute.

The recent publication of the 16th Edition of the Judicial College Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases, has brought a number of changes for industrial disease practitioners, in relation to: Work-related limb disorders: Vibration White Finger (VWF) and/ or Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS); work-related upper limb disorders (WRULD); and cold injuries.

Does the specific injury or disease which a claimant sustained need to be reasonably foreseeable for liability to be established?

I have been asked by a number of people if I can cover some of the cases which are frequently seen in Industrial Disease cases.

This is another case where the court (and parties) have had to consider findings of fact in relation to historic events, in this case with respect to a fatal mesothelioma claim.

This Judgment was given extempore during a CMC.

In this Asbestosis case, both limitation and causation were in dispute.

This Judgment concerned an appeal from the Claimant's unsuccessful Third Party disclosure Application: Sparkes (as personal representative of Pauline Sparkes, deceased) v London Pension Funds Authority and Leigh Academies Trust [2021] EWHC 1265 (QB), per Murray J.

This Judicial Review case was brought by the claimant council following an inquest.

This third article in relation to the Noise Immission level (NIL) considers some of the more complicated or arguable features.

This article considers how the NIL is used within the Coles guidelines.

The basic requirements for a diagnosis of Noise Induced Hearing Loss consist of 2 elements: audiology which is consistent with NIHL and a history of exposure to a sufficient amount of noise.

A narrow point that occasionally arises is how '3-years' is calculated for the purposes of limitation.

This case is the latest in a series where the issue as to the reliability and credibility of historic witness evidence has been raised.

Hamilton v NG Bailey Limited [2020] EWHC 2910 (QB) provides a useful view of how a court might approach quantum in an asbestosis case when considering damages on a provisional basis rather than as a full and final settlement.

Anyone who has ever read a medical report in a noise induced hearing loss case will be familiar with the medical expert commenting on whether a claimant has a history of riding a motorbike.

Occupational Deafness has been a prescribed disease since 1975.

In Holmes v S & B Concrete [2020] EWHC 2277 (QB) a novel argument was raised in relation to limitation for companies which had entered into voluntary liquidation.

Smith v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 1954 (QB) concerns a claim for asbestosis.

Last week I reviewed Goldtrail Travel v Grumbridge.

Section 32 is an infrequently used part of the Limitation Act 1980, but one from time to time which may have application within the Industrial Disease setting.

Judicial review cases are not the usual fare of this website.

I have recently drafted two articles regarding Smith v Manchester awards.

This short article covers a fundamental, but not straightforward, issue in noise induced hearing loss cases - calculating the Noise Immission Level.

This short article looks at ‘adjusting’ self-recording audiometry in order that it might be compared to manual audiometry such as pure tone audiometry.

In Part One of this series, I set out relevant factors as to whether a Smith v Manchester award was appropriate.

Many Industrial Disease cases contain a claim for a Smith v Manchester award on the Schedule.

The case of Valerie Bannister (Widow and Executrix of the Estate of Dennis Charles Bannister, Deceased) v Freemans PLC was dismissed at first instance for factual reasons related to exposure.

Accurate assessment of exposure is vital in industrial disease claims.

There is much debate at the moment about the different risks posed by being 1 or 2 metres away from a potential source of danger.

Chaplin v Pistol and another [2020] EWHC 1543 (QB), Mr Justice Jay, 16/06/2020 Reduced life expectancy is a common feature of industrial disease cases.

In Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairers, Mustill J said that “after publication of Noise and the Worker there was no excuse for ignorance.

Coffin v Ford Motor Company Limited Southampton County Court, 18 March 2008, HHJ Iain Hughes QC 'Coffin v Ford rates’ are still frequently cited on Schedules and Counter-Schedules in NIHL cases when it comes to recovery of the cost of hearing aids.

Maguire v Harland v Wolff PLC [2005] EWCA Civ 01 The Ongoing Relevance of this case: This Court of Appeal decision remains of relevance to practitioners when considering 'secondary exposure' cases – usually when a family member has developed an asbestos-related condition as a result of coming into contact with asbestos covered clothing of someone who worked with asbestos.

What is Noise?

Valerie Bannister (Widow and Executrix of the Estate of Dennis Charles Bannister, Deceased) v Freemans PLC [2020] EWHC 1256 (QB), before Geoffrey Tattersall QC sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court Introduction This was a mesothelioma claim where, ultimately, the Claimant lost on the facts and so did not prove any exposure to asbestos by the Defendants.

Gregory v H J Haynes Limited [2020] EWHC 911 (Ch), on appeal before Mr Justice Mann Introduction: This was an appeal from a decision by a District Judge who had declined to use the discretion to disapply the limitation period as available under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980.

Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairers [1984] Q.

The classification of HAVS has evolved over the years.

Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) – an Introduction Even those who are experienced in personal injury cases in general can sometimes find industrial diseases cases difficult to get to grips with.