header-logo header-logo

07 July 2011 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7473 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Tug of war

Richard Scorer on the battle to secure effective interim damages payments

In compensation claims for serious head and spinal injuries, the claimant’s solicitor will often try to secure an early interim payment of damages under CPR 25 to fund the costs of care and/or suitably adapted accommodation. Waiting several years until the end of the case before proper care is put in place can be very detrimental to the claimant.

Conversely, defendant insurers often want to resist making a substantial interim payment. Defendants argue that if the claimant secures a large interim payment and uses it to purchase a property and establish a care regime, it can be difficult at a subsequent trial for the defendant to effectively challenge the property and care package after the event.

Interim payments

CPR 25 empowers the court to award an interim payment where the claimant has obtained interlocutory judgment, or where the claimant would obtain judgment for a substantial sum from the defendant if the action went to trial. However, CPR 25.7 (4) provides that

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll