header-logo header-logo

Competing principles

27 November 2008 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7347 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Richard Scorer says a fine balanceis required for awarding damages to victims of serious injury

A recurring issue in personal injury litigation in recent years is the question of whether awards of damages to victims of serious injury should be reduced to reflect the victim’s entitlement to statutory services, whether care, accommodation or cash payments, from his or her local authority. The principle underlying personal injury compensation is that the damages awarded should put the injured party back in same financial position as if he had not been injured. However, under the National Assistance Act 1948, local authorities have a duty to assess a disabled person’s needs and where that person is eligible, to offer care and/or accommodation, and more recent legislation has given rise to entitlements to money payments to meet the costs of care (direct payments).

Defendants have argued that where the claimant’s needs will be met in whole or in part by the local authority, the claimant should give credit for that entitlement. Underlying this dispute is a clash of competing principles.

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

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

London firm announces acquisition of corporate team

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Head of corporate appointed following Teesside merger

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Firm expands into banking and finance sector with newly appointed head of banking

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll