header-logo header-logo

17 July 2019
Issue: 7849 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Discount rate change delights & dismays

The personal injury discount rate has been changed, delighting claimant lawyers but prompting insurance lawyers to express concern about the cost to public bodies

The new rate of -0.25%, announced by the Lord Chancellor David Gauke this week, is effective from 5 August 2019. The discount rate is used to calculate the large lump sum compensation awarded to victims of life-changing injuries, and reflects the interest they can expect to earn on investments.

The decision to change the current rate of - 0.75% follows a Call to Evidence launched by the Ministry of Justice in December 2018. The rate was lowered from 2.5% in 2017, leading to concerns defendants, particularly the NHS, were having to pay out too much money.

According to the Ministry, a 30-year-old male with annual financial costs of £50,000 would receive £2.9355m under the current rate, and £2.56525m under the new rate, a difference of £370,250.

Lord Chancellor Gauke said: ‘It is vital victims of life-changing injuries receive the correct compensation―I am certain this is the most balanced and fair approach following an extensive consultation.’

Jonathan Wheeler, managing partner at Bolt Burdon Kemp, said the government had ‘resisted insurers’ calls for the most seriously injured to make risky investments to maintain or “top up” their damages.’

However, Tony Cawley, Clyde & Co partner and member of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL), said: ‘It is very disappointing that the numerous representations made by FOIL and the insurance industry have failed to be taken into consideration.

‘Although the Lord Chancellor refers to the new statutory test in the announcement, FOIL does not believe that the new rate reflects how claimants actually invest their damages. [This] new confirmed rate will be particularly concerning to the insurance market generally but also to many public bodies.’

Insurance firm Kennedys partners Mark Burton and Christopher Malla said: ‘The Ministry of Justice had previously signalled a likely outcome of between 0% and 1%.

‘In practice, serious injury cases have been settling at levels based on a positive rate coming into force. The announcement of a negative rate is therefore surprising.’ 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll