We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 91

Clinicians held liable for statements in manufacturers' brochures

  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 11 2014

A recent Court of Appeal case serves as a useful reminder to suppliers of the risks involved if they pass on product information provided by a third

Hip implant manufacturers back in the spotlight as first DePuy Pinnacle trial begins

  • Penningtons Manches LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 8 2014

Following Johnson & Johnson's 2013 announcement of a $2.5 billion settlement to resolve claims for its DePuy ASR hip implant, the company is back

Plaintiffs’ causation case in the Zoloft MDL: is anything left after a second Daubert opinion?

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 19 2014

The week after Weeks II, we are not in position to tout our prognosticating on that decision. We had certainly hoped that a rehearing would have

Conflict of laws in product liability cases and the territorial application of the Consumer Protection Act 1987

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 31 2014

The English High Court handed down judgment in a case concerning the applicable law in relation to product liability claims and the territorial scope

Cosmetic clinicians' denial of liability for misleading statements in product manufacturer's promotional material raises a few eyebrows in the court of appeal

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 31 2014

In Webster v Liddington (2014), the Court of Appeal unanimously upheld a decision of the lower court that a group of cosmetic clinicians were liable

English High Court dismisses judicial review of MHRA's decision to not treat glucosamine-containing food supplements as medicines

  • Bird & Bird
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 23 2014

In a Judgment handed down on 22 May 2014, the English High Court refused an application for judicial review of the UK's Medicine and Healthcare

Yates v Revenue & Custom

  • Clyde & Co LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 22 2014

The “specialist mesothelioma list” refers to a procedure established by the Royal Courts of Justice whereby two specialist Masters hear all types of

Hoisted by her own petard: a qualified epidemiologist’s causation opinions get tossed across an MDL

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 15 2014

Birth defects are scary. We suspect most parents among our readers can remember their relief upon hearing the pronouncement "normal" during a

Lawyers sued in UK for filing “hopeless claim” trying to link autism and vaccines

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 10 2014

A man who was reportedly diagnosed with autism three years after receiving a measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine has evidently sued the legal team

Is your child at risk due to their car seat ?

  • Bolt Burdon Kemp
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 23 2014

I know I'm not alone in finding car seats baffling. Not only are there so many types to choose from, but fitting them can also be a nightmare. They