header-logo header-logo

Knauer changes PI law

03 March 2016
Issue: 7689 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The date of trial is the relevant date when assessing damages for fatal accidents, the Supreme Court has held.

The landmark case of Knauer v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 9 concerned the appropriate date for the assessment of multipliers in claims brought under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976—whether it is the date of death or the date of trial.

Sally Knauer was an administrator at Guy’s Marsh Prison in Dorset, where she was exposed to asbestos. She subsequently contracted mesothelioma and died at the age of 46. Her husband brought a claim for future loss of dependency under the 1976 Act. The respondent admitted liability and legal argument centred on the relevant date for assessing damages.

In a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court allowed Knauer’s appeal, holding that the relevant date was the date of trial. This is in line with a recommendation by the Law Commission in their 1999 report, Claims for Wrongful Death. The Justices overturned Cookson v Knowles [1976] AC 556 and Graham v Dodds [1983] 1 WLR 808, which they said were decided at a time when calculation of damages was less sophisticated and did not use actuarial evidence or tables.

Tom Poole, of 3 Hare Court, says: “This is an extremely important development in the law and will be of particular importance to a large number of families who are wrongfully deprived of income and services of a family member. The difference in approach meant an increase in Mr Knauer’s damages of over £50,000 and will likely see larger dependency awards in all fatal accident cases.”

In their judgment, the Justices said that calculating damages for loss of dependency from the date of death, rather than the date of trial, means that the claimant suffers a discount for early receipt of the money when in fact that money will not be received until after trial, a discount that results in under-compensation in most cases.

Issue: 7689 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll