header-logo header-logo

Damaged

24 July 2009 / Andrew Ritchie KC
Issue: 7379 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Who should pay for additional educational needs, asks Andrew Ritchie QC

Children and adolescents who have suffered brain injury as a result of a tort will have additional needs for educational assistance. The state provides schools and (questionably) adequate education for the general population. It also provides additional help for those with special needs, but often does not cater adequately for them. So can the claimant recover damages for his additional educational needs?

The main principle 

Damages are recoverable in full for the additional cost and expense involved in providing for an injured child’s special needs where those needs were caused by the defendant’s tort. Other examples of heads of loss where the defendant is required to fund the costs of the injured child’s special needs include: speech therapy; occupational therapy; physiotherapy; specially adapted household aids and equipment; adapted IT aids and equipment; specially adapted transport; nursing care; and housing.

This statement of the full compensation principle springs from a long established tort rule summarised 129 years ago by Lord Blackburn in Livingstone v

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll