We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

Protection of Public Health

Personal Injury Compensation

Protection of Public Health

Arkin v Marshall [2020] EWCA Civ 620

One of the main reasons for many of the changes that interrupted the usual pattern of life was the need to protect the health of the public. The Coronavirus Act 2020 provides the powers required for the appropriate bodies to introduce provisions for that purpose. A question recently arose as to whether CPR PD 51Z had been properly authorised by CPR r51.2 as a pilot scheme to impose an automatic 90-day stay of proceedings as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, whether or not it was inconsistent with the Coronavirus Act 2020 or the principle of access to justice under art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Court of Appeal held that although in principle the court had jurisdiction to lift a stay imposed under PD 51Z, it was difficult to envisage a case in which it would do so in view of the need to relieve the burden on court staff and protect public health during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?

Devices

Request a trial Find out more