header-logo header-logo

11 October 2007
Issue: 7292 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Personal Injury Update

CLAIM FOR DEPENDENCY >>
INTERPRETATION OF FAA 1976 >>
HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE >>

FATAL ACCIDENTS: SETTLEMENT PRIOR TO DEATH A BAR TO RECOVERY

In Thompson v Arnold [2007] EWHC 1875, [2007] All ER (D) 38 (Aug) Mr Justice Langstaff, sitting in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court, re-emphasised an important potential pitfall for those advising claimants whose injuries are such that they might lead to death in the near future.
It has been well established, since the case of Read v The Great Eastern Railway Company (1868) LR 3 QB 555, that a dependant will be precluded from pursuing a claim for dependency under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 (FAA 1976) in circumstances where the deceased has settled his or her outstanding claim for damages against the defendant tortfeasor during his or her lifetime. This follows from the wording of the FAA 1976 which, by virtue of s 1(1), permits a dependant to maintain an action for damages under that act only if the deceased would (if death had not ensued) have been entitled

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

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Firm enhances advisory capability with strategic risk specialist hire

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Insurance and reinsurance specialist joins policyholder disputes practice as partner

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll