header-logo header-logo

21 February 2008 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7309 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury , Employment
printer mail-detail

Future proof? (1)

In the first of two articles, Nicholas Bevan explains why Thompstone represents a sea change for future care claims

In January 2008, the Court of Appeal released what is one of the most important rulings of the decade in tortious law, Thompstone v Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust (and three other conjoined appeals) [2008] EWCA Civ 5, [2008] All ER (D) 72 (Jan). It concerns a technical issue: whether and in what circumstances a court may depart from the Retail Prices Index (RPI), set by the Damages Act 1996 (DA 1996), s 2(8), when inflation-proofing a periodical payments order in a personal injury claim featuring future loss. This decision will propel the periodical payments regime from the backwaters into the mainstream as a means of delivering compensation for future loss in personal injury claims. The appeals involve claims by individuals who have been severely injured at birth due to negligent treatment by a local health authority or NHS trust. All four claims include substantial amounts to meet the lifelong cost of providing

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll