header-logo header-logo

17 April 2024
Issue: 8067 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Dual personal injury rate too complex & costly, says Apil

Personal injury lawyers have warned against introducing a dual or multiple personal injury discount rate—the rate used to calculate damages in serious, life-changing injury cases

A rate of -0.25% was set in 2019 (adjusted from -0.75% in 2017). In January, the Ministry of Justice issued a call for evidence on the rate, including whether dual or multiple rates should be used, in its paper ‘Setting the personal injury discount rate’.

Responding this week, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (Apil) opposed a dual rate. It highlighted that catastrophic injury claim schedules are frequently 50 to 100 pages long, with hundreds of individual calculations, so changing to a dual or multiple rate ‘would significantly increase the complexity and costs of these calculations leading to the risk of error’.

Apil pointed to the dual/multiple rate system in Ontario, Canada, where parties often have to use experts to make the calculations. Apil said claimants would find it difficult to make informed decisions about settlement offers due to the added complexity.

Jonathan Scarsbrook, president of Apil, said: ‘Compensation is not a lottery win and neither is setting the discount rate a hypothetical maths problem.’

Scarsbrook said that, despite the Lord Chancellor’s adjustment of the rate in 2019, ‘a third of claimants were still expected to be unable to meet their total financial losses.

‘One of the realities is that claimants are usually advised to invest through a discretionary fund manager who can actively manage the portfolio. The actual cost of this must be taken into account, as must the increased tax burden, with personal allowance not moving over time and with capital gains tax and dividend allowances falling back significantly since 2019.

‘When taken together, the impact of these realities on catastrophic injury claims, where damages payments can easily reach £10 million, can be huge.’

Issue: 8067 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll