header-logo header-logo

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

Competing principles

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll