header-logo header-logo

Dual personal injury rate too complex & costly, says Apil

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

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

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll