header-logo header-logo

26 April 2012 / Patrick Allen
Issue: 7511 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The right target?

Patrick Allen sums up the current approach to the discount or enhancement of damages

Assessing damages for future loss, particularly in catastrophic personal injury cases, is a complex exercise and has been the subject of much controversy over recent years.

The starting point is the principle of full compensation. The object of the award is to place the injured party in the same financial position they would have been in but for the accident (Hodgson v Trapp [1989] AC 807, [1988] 3 All ER 870).

Calculations

A claimant typically needs compensation for loss of earnings for their working life and the cost of care and other services until their death. An annual sum is calculated for these losses—the multiplicand. The number of years of losses is reduced to prevent overcompensation because a lump sum given to the claimant will be invested and yield a return. The correct sum is the amount where the capital and income from the lump sum is exhausted over the period of the loss.

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll