header-logo header-logo

27 November 2024
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Compensation
printer mail-detail

Whiplash boost fails to impress

A 15% increase in the tariff for soft tissue injuries ‘is not enough’, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has warned.

The Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood announced the rise last week in response both to Consumer Price Index inflation since 2021, when whiplash reforms took effect and tariffs were introduced, and forecasted inflation to May 2027, when the next statutory review is likely to take place.

Under the Civil Liability Act 2018, the Lord Chancellor sets a tariff for whiplash injuries of up to two years in duration and makes regulations to do so, and is required to review those regulations within three years of implementation. The Act also banned offers to settle claims without medical evidence.

Mahmood kept the existing split structure of whiplash only and whiplash plus minor psychological injury tariffs, and the allowable judicial uplift of 20% of the tariff award for exceptional injuries or circumstances. She made no change to the definitions of what constitutes appropriate medical evidence and who may provide it prior to an offer to settle being made.

However, APIL president Kim Harrison said: ‘Following this review injured people will receive less compensation in real terms than they did in 2021 when the tariff was introduced.

‘If the Lord Chancellor were simply to increase the actual tariff, as introduced, in line with inflation using the Consumer Price Index, rather than making convoluted predictions about future inflation, the increase to damages in the tariff would be 22%. Increases in inflation have been eroding injured people’s damages since the tariff was introduced, a tariff which was set at an insulting, arbitrary level to begin with.

‘The facts are that since the tariff came into effect, the number of claims has plummeted, the cost of injury claims to insurers has nosedived, and yet motor premiums have continued to rise.’

Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury , Compensation
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Jonathan Askin

Hugh James—Jonathan Askin

London corporate and commercial team announces partner appointment

Michelman Robinson—Daniel Burbeary

Michelman Robinson—Daniel Burbeary

Firm names partner as London office managing partner

Kingsley Napley—Jonathan Grimes

Kingsley Napley—Jonathan Grimes

Firm appoints new head of criminal litigation team

NEWS
Personal injury lawyers have welcomed a government U-turn on a ‘substantial prejudice’ defence that risked enabling defendants in child sexual abuse civil cases to have proceedings against them dropped
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
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
back-to-top-scroll