header-logo header-logo

08 August 2012
Issue: 7526 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

PI discount rate finally reviewed

Government consults on discount rate after campaign by lawyers

The government has launched a long-awaited review of the personal injury discount rate, following a campaign by claimant lawyers.

Injured persons usually receive their compensation, intended to make up for future loss of earnings, in a one-off lump-sum payment. Claimants often invest this money, so the courts make adjustments to ensure the claimant is not over-compensated.

In making this calculation, the courts follow guidance laid down by the House of Lords in Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345. They apply a discount rate of 2.5%, although courts may decide a different rate is appropriate in individual cases.

This rate was set by the Lord Chancellor in 2001, under s 1 of the Damages Act 1996, and is based on predicted yields from index-linked government gilts. However, yields from these have been declining for years and claimant lawyers have argued that the rate is now set too high.

The Ministry of Justice consultation Damages Act 1996: The Discount Rate, published last week, proposes two main alternative positions. These are: to use a gilts-based calculation using modern data; and to move from gilts to a mixed portfolio of appropriate investments using current data.

Christopher Malla, a partner at Kennedys, says: “Any reduction to the discount rate will have a significant impact on damages paid by our clients who are compensators of a broad spectrum of personal injury claims, particularly on the high-value claims which can already attract multi-million-pound awards. It is imperative that all parties with a stake in this issue come together during this long-awaited consultation to achieve a fair and balanced outcome.”

The consultation will end on 23 October 2012.

Last year, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers launched a judicial review on the issue, but it stalled after the justice secretary promised a consultation.

Issue: 7526 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

Shakespeare Martineau—Serena Eddy

Shakespeare Martineau—Serena Eddy

London restructuring team strengthened by legal director appointment

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll