Qing Li & Ors v Fan Demetris Yuan & Anor [2026] EWHC 272 (Comm) Qing Li & Ors v Fan Demetris Yuan & Anor [2026] EWHC 272 (Comm)

Qing Li & Ors v Fan Demetris Yuan & Anor [2026] EWHC 272 (Comm)

Shortly after the close of the trial, the Claimants sought permission to rely on a short further addendum report from their expert in PRC law, Mr X....
Working with Expert Witnesses in Construction Working with Expert Witnesses in Construction

Working with Expert Witnesses in Construction

Working with expert witnesses... is a new monthly article series. The series takes a look at the role of expert witnesses in a range of sectors...
Civil Justice Council Consultation on Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents Civil Justice Council Consultation on Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents

Civil Justice Council Consultation on Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents

The Civil Justice Council (‘CJC’) has published an Interim Report and Consultation on the Use of AI for preparing court documents. The...
Moulding -v- BSA Group (SW) Ltd & others, HHJ Berkley, County Court at Bristol 16th... Moulding -v- BSA Group (SW) Ltd & others, HHJ Berkley, County Court at Bristol 16th...

Moulding -v- BSA Group (SW) Ltd & others, HHJ Berkley, County Court at Bristol 16th...

The claimants, who own a property adjoining with the properties of the defendants, complained that the defendants engaged in various acts of trespass...
Podcast Episode 22: Feedback and Criticism Podcast Episode 22: Feedback and Criticism

Podcast Episode 22: Feedback and Criticism

In February's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at feedback and criticism. We go over the rules, discuss the key recent case...
A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness

Dr Jane Duff is a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, Head of the National Spinal Injuries Centre Psychology Service, and an Expert Witness. Here, she...
McLaren Indy LLC & Anor v Alpa Racing USA LLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 110 (Comm) McLaren Indy LLC & Anor v Alpa Racing USA LLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 110 (Comm)

McLaren Indy LLC & Anor v Alpa Racing USA LLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 110 (Comm)

The claimant alleged that the second defendant, a Spanish racing driver, had repudiated a binding agreement under which he was contracted to drive for...
Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 2 Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 2

Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 2

The Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, chaired by Sir Brian Leveson, has just published Part 2 of the Review with 135 recommendations,...
A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

Veterinary surgeon, Jeremy Stattersfield, has been guiding courts on veterinary medicine since 1981. He told us how he got into the Expert Witness...
Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions

Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions

In January's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we discuss responding to written questions. We look at the rules and regulations, discuss a...
Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025 Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Join us for the last podcast of 2025! With some festive cheer, we review 2025, with the ten key issues for expert witnesses that we've seen over...
A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

Mr Niall Craig is a Consultant Orthopaedic Spinal Surgeon and Expert Witness specialising in complex spinal cases. He tells us about his professional...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Aerotoxic syndrome
Keith Rix 2400

Aerotoxic syndrome

byKeith Rix

 

Commentary

Personal injury claims are being brought by approximately 220 pilots and cabin crew at the High Court in London on the grounds of aerotoxic syndrome (ATS). This group of claimants includes 51 claims which were issued by Thompsons in March 2019 involving pilots and cabin crew working for EasyJet, British Airways, Thomas Cook, Jet2 and Virgin Atlantic. These two claims are not included in these ongoing English collective proceedings. These were claims by two pilots who lost the chance of bringing successful claims as a result of the admitted negligence of a Scottish law practice.

Although the central medical issue in this case was aerotoxicity, it is important to bear in mind that what the court did not have to decide whether the pursuers, airline pilots, had proved causation on the balance of probabilities. Rather, it was required to value the chances of success in their underlying claims that they lost as a result of the solicitors’ admitted negligence. It is therefore important not to see this as a "trial within a trial". However, experts instructed in the collective proceedings will be greatly assisted by this judgment because it identifies the nature of the expert evidence that will be needed, it reveals how the credibility of experts may be challenged and how their evidence is likely to be tested by the adverse parties and judged by the court. 

Case

These were two separate actions. Both actions were brought by former pilots as clients against a firm of solicitors. Both pursuers were interested in pursuing claims for damages against their former employers. Ultimately, no such claims were brought by the defender on behalf of the pursuers. In each of the present actions, the pursuer sued the defender for breach of contract and reparation for the loss of a chance to have brought personal injury claims against their former employers.

In each case, the pursuer claimed that he suffers from a number of chronic symptoms which had prevented him from continuing his work as a pilot. Specifically, each pursuer claimed to suffer from aerotoxic syndrome (ATS). This is a controversial diagnosis. The condition is not recognised in the International Classification of Diseases and there are no generally accepted or validated diagnostic criteria for it. Each pursuer maintained that his condition had been caused by exposure to toxic fumes on a daily basis while he was employed as a pilot.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.