In deze kroniek worden in het kort de belangrijkste ontwikkelingen in de jurisprudentie in de jaren 2010 en 2011 besproken. Als nieuwe ontwikkelingen zijn onder meer te noemen beschikkingen in deelgeschillen en uitspraken op het gebied van de Wet bescherming persoonsgegevens. Er wordt onder meer ingegaan op uitspraken op het gebied van integriteitschade, de aansprakelijkheid van de hulpverlener door gebruikmaking van een gebrekkige hulpzaak, onrechtmatige uitlatingen over zorgverleners op internet en de causale toerekening, waarbij aan de orde is of deze al dan niet wordt doorbroken door het feit dat de patiënt zelf in de gelegenheid is de schade te voorkomen.

Adjudication by single judge or by a panel of judges: what difference does it make? Until the eighties, panels consisting of three judges predominantly presided on judicial cases in the Netherlands . As a result of arrears in settling cases, it was decided that one judge should administer justice should in first instance and in principle. However, little is known about the substantial differences between adjudication by single judge courts and panels, particularly when it comes to the quality of decision making. In his PhD research, Reyer Baas examines the substantial differences and similarities between these types of adjudication. The main method applied in this research is paired comparison between judgements in civil cases that are very similar in terms of content. Some of the examined cases are handled by one judge, other cases are considered by a panel of judges. Judges are surveyed and interviewed about their experiences with and opinions on adjudication in chambers consisting of one or three judges; (single judge and panels) court sessions and hearings in chambers are observed; and figures are gathered that show the extent to which judgements given by one judge and by three judges are reversed on appeal.