Part two: Who should pay for additional educational needs? Andrew Ritchie QC
In the first part of this article, I examined the main principles and the law related to a claim for damages for additional educational needs (see NLJ, 24 July 2009, p 1055). In this follow up, I consider the arguments claimants can use to persuade a court to award damages for the additional costs of education where it is available on the state.
The first step in assessing the educational needs and costs in a brain damage case is to obtain a report from an educational psychologist on the child’s special educational needs.
If the child’s needs are being met by the state and there is no need for more in future then no claim will arise. However, if the expert advises that the state provision is inadequate or will soon become inadequate then a claim for damages for additional educational provision will arise.
Compulsory insurance
The claimant’s first argument is that the tortfeasor should pay not the state. That is one
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
