B was injured in a hit and run accident in 1993 when he was 3 years old. His parents did not seek compensation from the MIB under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972 (UTDA) until he was 11 years old.

The facts: D was a veterinary surgeon who had arranged for a horse to undergo surgery to its legs. A year later, D carried out a pre-purchase examination of the horse for C.

Between 1983 and 1989, D acquired approximately 680 acres of heavily contaminated land in Corby from the British Steel Corporation with a view to reclamation and redevelopment.

An 11 year old sustained a severe brain injury caused by a much taller and heavier 15 year old, when playing on a bouncy castle.

The first lump sum of £129,600 came from a death in service benefit scheme operated by H's employer (D). D paid the premiums for the scheme, under which a lump sum was payable to D if an employee died.

Where there are several explanations of the cause of loss, all of which are highly improbable, then the judge should not select the least improbable cause, but should decide the case on the basis that the claimant has not proved his loss.

The facts: C purchased a large printing press from D1. D2 provided the finance. C alleged that the press was defective, and that in consequence it suffered extensive losses.

C had a 'before the event' (BTE) legal expenses insurance policy that entitled C to legal representation for certain insured events.

Out of the three new fields of discrimination outlawed since 2003, age was always going to be the most challenging one to implement. As with sexual orientation and religion or belief discrimination, age discrimination derives from the European Union under the Framework Directive.

The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE) have been with us for over a quarter of a century, however, TUPE 2006 continues to raise questions.