Court of Protection—Damages

In most cases where an individual’s assets derived exclusively from a damages award for personal injury, when determining whether making an inter vivos gift was in his or her best interests, the factor of magnetic importance was likely to be the purpose for which the compensation was awarded and the assumptions upon which it was based. That was not confined to multiplicands and multipliers that had been applied in a specific case, but extended to the fundamental principles that underlined personal injury and clinical negligence litigation generally. It was not the function of the court to anticipate, ring-fence or maximise any potential inheritance for the benefits of family members on the death of a protected party, because that was not the purpose for which the compensation for personal injury was intended.