No injustice demonstrated in ADR scheme dealing with defective hip cases

Alternative dispute resolution – practice and procedure – personal injuries – in 2014 there were over 1,000 anticipated cases involving claims for damages as a result of the allegedly defective hip replacements – alternative dispute resolution scheme established – objections to the scheme - scheme provided for resolution without attribution of liability and awarding of damages by a panel of barristers and retired judges who would assess damages based upon paper records - DePuy could refuse to allow certain claimants access to the Scheme – the scheme – operation of the scheme – eligibility to the scheme - number of claimants remaining – application to revise the scheme – want DePuy to withdraw causation – do not want DePuy to ask for further medical investigation – do not want DePuy to make further request for medical records - scheme was entered into to provide monetary awards to those entitled to enter and not to engage in issues of causation - revision within 10 years of the operation but not earlier than a 180 days – solicitors firm have resolved proportionately few of the its claims - complaints about excessive medical examination – previous applications to revise the scheme - application has entirely failed to show any such injustice in the operation of the scheme – attempting to fundamentally alter the scheme – delay caused by failure to engage with the scheme – DePuy entitled to raise causation and to seek medical examination – scheme does not deprive access to the courts – no good reason to bypass the scheme advanced – application to revise the scheme refused –