header-logo header-logo

27 April 2020
Issue: 7884 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: single payout for bereaved families

The Health Secretary’s death in service benefit for families of healthcare workers may not go far enough, the British Medical Association (BMA) has warned

Matt Hancock announced this week that a single sum of £60,000 will be paid to the dependants of health and social care workers who die from COVID-19 in the course of essential frontline work. The time-limited scheme is for the duration of the pandemic, starting on 25 March, but claims for deaths before this will be considered.

The BMA, Royal College of Nursing (RCN) and other health unions have lobbied the government to provide full death in service benefits to all NHS staff regardless of whether they are a member of the NHS pension scheme.

However, the BMA said that, while the sum may provide immediate financial relief, it could leave families bereft of longer-term financial security, particularly if their loved one was not a current member of the NHS pension scheme or had only recently joined the scheme.

Dr Vishal Sharma, BMA pensions committee chair, said: ‘Whilst this single payment may seem a sizeable sum, it comes nowhere near compensating families for the lifetime income their loved one may have earned if they hadn’t died prematurely, fighting this crisis on the frontline.

‘This is particularly true for young or recently qualified staff. The BMA will be examining closely the detail of the government’s life assurance scheme.’

Dame Donna Kinnair, General Secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said: ‘We will examine the detail closely.

‘It must be easily accessed, open to those in social care and primary care too and be paid promptly―no family should face a lengthy or complex process.’

Meanwhile, Bindmans partner Jamie Potter is acting for two doctors in a judicial review to challenge the government’s PPE guidance and sourcing. Pre-action correspondence was sent last week.

Potter said: ‘There needs to be a public inquiry in due course, but what those workers deserve right now is transparency as to the risks they are facing with different levels of PPE and confirmation they are entitled to refuse to work where they consider the risks too great.’

Issue: 7884 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll