An adviser to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has said the court should uphold its own ruling from 2009, which said that delayed passengers could make a flight delay claim for between 250 and 600 euros depending on the distance of their flight.

Airlines and travel firms have been challenging the ruling, which applies to passengers delayed by three hours or more, and the situation has become unclear.

The ECJ is expected to make its final decision on flight delay compensation by the end of this year.

Yves Bot, an Advocate General to the court, advises judges on particular decisions. They are not under any obligation to take the advice, but often do so.

Under European regulations from 2004, airlines must offer help and pay compensation in certain cases for cancellations and delays not caused by extraordinary circumstances.

The 2009 ECJ ruling added that delayed passengers should get the same treatment as if their flight had been cancelled if the delay was longer than three hours. This meant financial compensation, whereas previously they could only claim for meals and refreshments, two telephone calls, and hotel accommodation and transfers for an overnight delay.

Some airlines have refused to recognise this judgment, which is why a final decision is needed. An appeal by a group including British Airways and Easy Jet persuaded the High Court to refer the matter back to the ECJ for clarification, putting on hold any new claims for flight delays.

They said paying compensation for delays of three hours or more was disproportionate and too great a burden, in some cases being more than the value of the tickets.

Advocate General Bot said: “The proportion of flights for which delay confers entitlement to the compensation provided for in Article 7 of the regulation is less than 0.15%.”

The Civil Aviation Authority added: “We will uphold the law and will make sure the operators obey the law as required.”

Andrew Downes of Brimingham was left wheelchair-bound after a hospital misdiagnosed his fractured spine as a urine infection.

He suffered a fall at home in October 2009 and was admitted to Russells Hall Hospital in Dudley. Staff administered morphine after Mr Downes complained of severe back pain but they diagnosed a urine infection. He was not sent for an X-ray, which would have revealed his fractured spine.

Mr Downes lost all feeling in both legs after developing a complete spinal cord injury and will now require medical attention for life to help him be as independent as possible.

“The back pain was far worse than anything I’d experienced before and I knew it definitely wasn’t a urine infection,” he said.

“When I was asked to walk around it made the pain excruciating, I knew something wasn’t right.”

The composer is now back at work having returned just 10 months after the fall, and is set to host a concert in aid of Paraplegic Sports in Birmingham this October.

But being unable to run around and play with his three young grandchildren is devastating, he added.

He hopes the trust will take note and improve their care in future so that no one else goes through the same thing.

Mr Downes had suffered from inflammatory back pain and a fused spine for many years but his solicitors said the medical staff did not take his condition into account.

They allege a catalogue of errors, including: diagnosing a urine infection without thorough tests; failing to examine his back sufficiently through tests; failing to send him for an X-ray which would have highlighted the damage; and failing to ensure he was kept completely still, instead taking him for painful walks round the ward which were likely to have caused more damage.

It was only when Mr Downes had lost all movement and feeling in his legs that he was taken for scans.

Medical negligence claims are possible if medical staff have failed to carry out their duties properly. This means they did not give the standard of care that could be reasonably expected of someone with their training, qualifications and experience.

NHS staff, GPs, surgeons, nurses, dentists, physiotherapists and all types of medical staff can be held to account for negligence by making a claim.

Stephen Dinsdale was on a stag weekend staying at the Hotel Victoria in Newquay when the incident happened in April 2010, the Press Association reports.

The 44-year-old was with five friends in a lift at the hotel when it became stuck. Staff assured them it would be winched down, but it fell 100ft and hit the concrete base of the lift shaft.

They were then stuck for 45 minutes before being rescued by lifeboat services as the base was next to a sandy cover underneath the hotel.

The IT analyst says he is now unable to play with his young children because of the knee injury. He suffered from nightmares and flashbacks as a result of the incident and has not regained use of his injured leg. He could lose the limb.

“The whole experience was just terrifying,” he told the news provider.

“We were meant to be on a stag weekend having a great time but on the first day things just went drastically wrong.”

His solicitors have launched the personal injury claim and say that an investigation revealed that the lift had not had a thorough examination since July 2008 because there was asbestos present.

Less detailed inspections between 2008 and 2010 identified a number of defects and showed that the lift had become stuck with people inside on previous occasions.

Mr Dinsdale’s case demonstrates how members of the public put their safety in the hands of other people and companies every day and expect them to uphold their duties.

Landowners and firms must maintain property to which the general public have access to a high standard and take reasonable steps to protect against harm and prevent accidents.

In cases where they do not meet their obligations, such as seems to be the situation with Mr Dinsdale’s accident, it can be possible to make personal injury claims.

Making a claim is your right if you were hurt in an accident that was not your fault. Not only does it give you access to the compensation you deserve, it also holds those responsible to account and could prevent the same thing from happening to someone else.

You have every right to contact a personal injury solicitor and find out about making a claim, so don’t be afraid or embarrassed to do so.

Christine Horsfield is calling for compensation after husband Roger’s death and his calling on his former colleagues to help with the investigation into where and when he came into contact with asbestos fibres.

Roger died of lung cancer in October 2010 and an inquest into his death found evidence of asbestos exposure, the Star reports. The coroner said this was likely to have contributed to the lung cancer and recorded a verdict of death due to industrial disease.

Christine is now taking advice from solicitors to find out where her husband came into contact with the deadly fibres.

He worked as a plumber and heating engineer for several firms, including Sheffield Corporation Public Works Department from 1961 to 1967, Foster Wheeler from 1967 to 1969, and Eric C Flower Ltd from 1968 to 1995.

Mrs Horsfield told the news provider that she and her two daughters have been devastated by Roger’s death.

“He had difficulty breathing and suffered greatly due to his illness before he eventually passed away. It was heartbreaking,” she said.

“Nothing can bring him back to us, but we just want to get to the bottom of where he was exposed to asbestos.”

Solicitors are investigating working conditions at the firms Mr Horsfield worked for with a view to making an asbestos-related disease claim for the family.

The use of asbestos has been banned for many years now, but it was previously widely used in many industries. Those working as plumbers, engineers, builders and miners were at particular risk of exposure.

Even if companies have ceased trading and although they were not aware of the risks at the time, victims and their families can still make compensation claims for asbestos exposure.

There are now many rules and regulations surrounding asbestos, as although it is no longer in use many buildings still contain it.

The Health and Safety Executive explains that if a building could contain asbestos steps should be taken before work commences. This includes determining the type and condition of the asbestos, carrying out surveys and risk assessments, determining the level of risk to health and whether work should be carried out by a licensed contractor, deciding if and how the work should be notified and controlled and ensuring anyone working on the site is properly trained.

Natasha Flockhart, 21, says she was thrown through the open doors of the bus as she reached out to accept a bottled soft drink from the driver, WalesOnline reports.

She has now lodged a bus accident claim for hundreds of thousands of pounds against the driver and bus firm Briggs Coaches. She is seeking damages of more than £300,000, including a personal injury claim in excess of £1,000.

Ms Flockhart suffered serious head injuries in the incident, which occurred as the minibus went over a speed bump.

She was in a coma and had to undergo surgery on a blood clot in her brain and bleeding in her brain and claims she now suffers post-traumatic migraine headaches as a result.

In the papers, lodged at the High Court, she said the driver, Mark Bowles, is “vicariously liable” due to negligence for the incident in June 2008.

The claim states: “She was sitting behind him. As he drove along Broughton Avenue, Blaenymaes, he offered her a bottle of Lucozade. As she stood to accept it from him, he drove over a speed bump.

“The minibus jolted and she lost her balance and fell out of the open doors of the minibus, landing on the main road and injuring herself.”

Ms Flockhart has also said she is now at “significantly increased risk” of developing epilepsy and has been unable to pursue her career. She alleges that Mr Bowles was driving too fast and that he “caused, permitted or suffered” the door to open and failed to warn her that the speed bump could cause the vehicle to jolt.

She alleges that he failed to take adequate care for her safety, exposing her to danger and a “foreseeable risk of injury”.

“As a result of the negligence of the second defendant [Mr Bowles], the claimant suffered a severe closed brain injury,” the claim continues.

“She continues to suffer from post-traumatic migrainous, episodic headaches and from cognitive and psychological impairment.”

If Ms Flockhart does develop epilepsy she is seeking an order to allow her to claim for further compensation.

Milly Evans, now 11, has been given the multimillion-pound sum to pay for care after her family made a medical negligence claim against Lincoln County Hospital.

The NHS has agreed to the payment after the hospital failed to monitor mum Kate during labour. It is believed to be one of the largest medical negligence compensation payments.

The case, heard at the High Court, stated that monitoring of Kate during labour was “totally inadequate” and three hours after being admitted the unborn baby had an abnormal heart rate and was in distress.

There was then a delay in delivering baby Milly and she was transferred to the neonatal unit where resuscitation procedures were carried out and she had a seizure.

Kate and partner Andy say that if hospital staff had properly monitored Milly’s heart rate the midwife would have known sooner that she was in distress and could have delivered her.

Milly has cerebral palsy, cannot speak and is dependent on others.

The compensation settlement includes a lump sum of £5.9 million and payments throughout Milly’s life that will rise to £204,000 a year.

Susan Rodway QC, acting for the parents, said it was “yet another incident of an avoidable accident at birth which caused devastating injuries”.

The United Lincolnshire Hospital NHS Trust admitted liability in March 2012 but contested the amount of compensation.

Milly now uses a wheelchair and has limited communication with the use of sophisticated eye-gaze equipment.

“The money will never make up for the mistake that condemned Milly to a lifetime of dependency on others,” said mum Kate.

They will use the compensation to move to a specially-adapted home with hoists and a hydrotherapy pool and to pay for Milly’s full-time care, treatment, education, special equipment and transport.

In another birth injury claim in Oxfordshire a 13-year-old schoolgirl has been awarded £4 million in compensation.

She was left brain damaged after blunders during her birth at the John Radcliffe Hospital. Lawyers said staff were negligence as they delayed her birth despite evidence of distress. She needed emergency resuscitation when born and now has cerebral palsy.

QC Lord Faulks said the settlement would be a £4,375,000 lump sum plus annual payments, the BBC reports. The NHS trust responsible for the hospital admitted liability and said it regrets the mistakes that were made.

The bank says it has been hit by a rise in claims during the first three months of the year as consumers stand up for their rights having been mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance.

The total provision for PPI claims by all banks now stands at more than £9 billion. The five largest – HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays, Lloyds Bank Group and Santander – account for £7.8 billion of that.

RBS and Lloyds Banking Group have recently upped their pots by £125 million and £375 million respectively.

So far, just £3 billion of the £9 billion set aside has been paid out in PPI compensation.

Stuart Gulliver, chief executive of HSBC, said bogus PPI claims are causing problems, creating “administrative hassle” that delays compensation to genuine victims of financial mis-selling.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has been heavily involved in the PPI claims scandal, monitoring banks and lenders and ensuring good practice is maintained in its role as the overseeing body in the UK.

It recently published guidance consultation to help firms provide redress to victims of PPI mis-selling.

The advice outlines the steps firms should make when writing to customers who may have been mis-sold and stresses the importance of clear explanation of the issue. It states that any letter must outline what the customer should do in response and give the time limit for taking action.

The FSA says letters should be “clear, fair and not misleading”, as well as free from financial jargon or marketing material.

Martin Wheatley, FSA managing director, said: “This is important guidance and marks a key moment in the story of PPI. So far the majority of payouts have been for complaints received before, or put on hold during, the judicial review. However, we are now beginning to see firms considering how to treat customers who were mis-sold but have not complained.”

By ensuring firms take clear action the FSA aims to prevent people running out of time to make a complaint, he continued.

Mr Wheatley urged anyone who receives a letter to consider it carefully and to respond if they feel they have been a victim of poor practice.

It is looking for reform of the injury claim system to help tackle the increases in car insurance premiums that have been seen in recent times.

The motoring body says that over the past two years whiplash injury claims have contributed to the biggest increase in car insurance costs ever recorded.

The average quote for comprehensive cover has risen by 50% in that time.

Ministers are hosting a motor insurance summit and the government is expected to outline proposals to help reduce the number of false claims being made.

They could include measures to tackle “questionable” medical evidence and encourage insurers to challenge dubious claims.

Of course, anyone who was legitimately injured in a car accident would still have the right to claim, but new policies would ensure the fraudsters abusing the system would be caught-out.

Simon Douglas, director of AA Insurance, said civil litigation at present “encourages” people to make a claim even if they have not suffered an injury.

“’The present dysfunctional system has also spawned a fraudulent multi-million-pound ‘cash for crash’ industry,” he commented.

“Reform can’t come soon enough. It is wrong that injury claims are rising while the number of accidents on Britain’s roads is falling.”

Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has said that under the government’s plans it would be “quicker, cheaper and easier for valid injury claims to be dealt with through the small claims court”.

The full proposals will be outlined in a consultation document later this year and will consider the feasibility of using independent medical panels to assess injuries. They would have no direct links to claimants or defendants and would replace the current assessment process which involves GPs or doctors employed by medical reporting bodies. Doctors can received a fee of up to £195 to process the claims.

It has also been suggested that the limit for personal injury claims in the small claims court could be raised from £1,000 to £5,000.

Furthermore, insurers will be encouraged to pass the savings back to customers, Mr Clarke added.

Karl Tonks, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, pointed out that whiplash injuries can have huge effects on quality of life and should not be trivialised.

”Before it announces a raft of propositions which risk barring genuinely injured people from bringing legitimate claims, the Government must have a wider debate about the real issues, and it must also hold the insurance industry to account,” he said.

Chavasse VC House is a £6.5 million centre at Colchester Garrison in Essex created in partnership between Help for Heroes, The Royal British Legion and Ministry of Defence. Fundraising efforts by Help for Heroes have helped to set up the centre and the Royal British Legion is also a huge financial supporter, giving £5.5 million over the next 10 years towards running costs.

Named in honour of Noel Chavasse, the only man in the First World War to be awarded the Victoria Cross twice, it aims to give top-quality care to injured armed forces members to help them get back to active duty or ease the transition to Civvy Street.

The centre can house up to 27 military personnel at a time, including two whole families, and there is room for a further 30 day residents.

As well as personal space and excellent care, Chavasse VC House has training facilities, classrooms, a gym and a support hub for advice and guidance.

It has been purpose-built for the needs of wounded servicemen and women and is the first of its kind in England. It will give welfare and physical support to help soldiers move forward and can also help with retraining and give psychological, financial and prosthetic support.

“This magnificent facility and the people who will work in it, including staff from the MoD and charity partners, will do vital work over the years,” said Colonel Mike Newman, Colchester Garrison Commander.

John Crisford, vice chairman of the Royal British Legion, said the centre will help wounded soldiers progress in a way previously not open to them.

“The range of support, both practical and emotional, that Colchester Personnel Recovery Centre will provide to the wounded, injured and sick service personnel who come here will make a vital contribution to their recovery, whether they return to duty or move into civilian life,” he said.

“They have given so much for our country and deserve nothing less.”

Bryn Parry, founder of Help for Heroes, added that the opening of the centre is an important milestone in the wider defence recovery capabilities.

“These men and women are young now but they will grow old and need the support now and for the rest of their lives and Chavasse VC House will provide that support to those who need it in the local area.”

Tory MP Guto Bebb is calling on the Treasury Select Committee to look into bank practices amid claims that they systematically mis-sold complicated interest hedging products.

Thousands of small business customers could be affected and many have already, or stand to lose, thousands of pounds because they were never warned about the risk.

Banks including Barclays, Lloyds Banking Group, HSBC and Royal Bank of Scotland have bee implicated.

“The scale of this is potentially very large. I am aware of about 500 cases, but I think we are only just touching upon the issue,” Mr Bebb told the Telegraph.

Some banks have already settled cases and solicitors are now launching rate swap mis-selling claims against financial institutions.

Affected business owners have seen costs go up as interest rates fall, putting their companies at risk.

Some financial mis-selling victims are part of an organisation called Bully Banks, which is trying to gather together those who think they have been mis-sold a financial product.

Sales staff for lenders have also come forward to say that their banks persuaded small business customers to buy interest rates hedges that ended up costing them money.

The rate swaps are designed so that banks cover the cost of increased payments if interest rate rises, but if rates fall the customer has to pay the bank. Many of the mis-sold products were taken out between 2006 and 2008 and it is said that they were not made aware of the conditions and that they could face payments.

Treasury financial secretary Mark Hoban has confirmed the review will take place when answering a parliamentary question from Jim Cunningham MP.

Mr Hoban said: “The FSA are considering additional information from the small businesses that purchased these products, to help them better quantify the size of the issue and to establish whether any banks have failed to comply with their obligations under the FSA conduct of business sourcebook.”

An FSA spokesman has added that the organisation is finding out more about the products, how they were sold and whether they met the needs of customers.

“We have already received some detailed information from banks in connection with their sales of interest rate swaps which we are considering and we have also spoken to a number of customers who have been affected,” he commented.

“If we find widespread evidence of breaches or mis-selling we will take appropriate action.”

The banks have denied the allegations and say the products were properly sold.