PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The High Court dismissed a claim for noise-related injury in Bevan v Ministry of Defence, where the claimant alleged ‘acoustic shock’ from military headset use, valued at over £530,000. Although breach of duty was admitted, the claim failed on causation: the court found that the Grindleford Criteria for diagnosing acoustic shock were not satisfied.
The court considered that the Grindleford Criteria were the appropriate framework for diagnosis. For practitioners, the decision provides authoritative guidance on handling acoustic shock claims and confirms that exposure and injury are insufficient absent a clear causal mechanism. Written by Jim Hester, barrister at Parklane Plowden Chambers.
You can read the full analysis here: Personal injury—occupational injury, acoustic shock (Bevan v Ministry of Defence).
The judgment can be viewed here.
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.
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.
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.
If you would like to instruct Jim to help you with your case, you can do so by getting in touch with Parklane Plowden Chambers.