header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 February 2023 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 8011 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way , CPR
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 3 February 2023

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
Insurers lashed by whipping; special account up; mousing to midnight; equity demands detriment; truth in the CoP; posties deemed to work; words to take your heart away

MIXED INJURIES, MIXED JUDGMENTS

At last. The Court of Appeal has spoken—two tongues to one—on the construction of s 3 of the Civil Liability Act 2018 (CLA 2018) (see ‘Civil way’, 171 NLJ 7924, p15). The question raised by the leapfrogged appeals in Hassam and another v Rabot and another [2023] EWCA Civ 19 was how the court was to assess damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity (PSLA) where the claimant suffers a whiplash caught by a tariff but also suffers additional injury which falls outside the scope of CLA 2018 and does not attract a tariff award.

The majority answer, adopting the claimants’ secondary case (with another win for Benjamin Williams KC) was that the court should assess the tariff award by reference to the Whiplash Injury Regulations 2021 (SI 2021/642); assess the award for non-tariff injuries on common

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll