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: 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