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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll