Damages

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

NOTE: On 2 December 2024, the Lord Chancellor announced that the discount rate would change to positive 0.5%. The positive 0.5% discount rate is effective from 11 January 2025. Schedule A1 to the Damages Act 1996 provides that subsequent reviews are to take place within five years of the conclusion of the previous review, which means that the next review must commence on or before 2 December 2029.

Damages

When assessing damages, it will not always be as straightforward as attributing all of the claimant’s ongoing medical problems to the alleged negligence. You must ascertain the actual damage caused by the defendant’s negligence. Assessment will be simpler if the claimant suffered no relevant pre-existing problems and the treatment should have fixed the injury, eg timely treatment of a wrist fracture in a young healthy patient. However, assessment can be significantly more complex if there were pre-existing problems that were likely to impact on the claimant in any event, eg osteoarthritis or mental health issues, or if the incident exacerbated or expedited the onset of other conditions.

For further guidance, see Practice Note: Damages in

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest PI & Clinical Negligence News

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—3 July 2025

This week’s edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights features key amendments to legal aid regulations and a Court of Appeal ruling reinforcing the need for timely progression of road traffic claims. We include decisions on highway authority liability, clinical negligence due to delayed diagnosis and data misuse by an employer causing exacerbation of psychological injuries. We also explore cases involving in costs transparency and recovery of success fees and ATE premiums. In addition, we have our usual roundup of other news, content updates and New Law Journal articles of interest.

Court of Appeal confirms power to order compliance with pre-action protocols if an extant Part 8 claim exists (MH Site Maintenance Services Ltd and another company v Watson)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The case concerned the extremely important jurisdictional point as to whether the court has any case management powers to require a claimant to progress a claim within the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Claims in Road Traffic Accidents once the claim has been issued and stayed via CPR Part 8 for limitation purposes. In reversing the determination by the District Judge at first instance and Circuit Judge on first appeal that no such jurisdiction existed, the Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Coulson, Lord Justice Andrews and Lord Justice Holgate) unanimously decided that it does have the requisite powers. The decision sends a clear message that the parties should co-operate to ensure further compliance with the Protocol and also that the culture of lengthy periods of inactivity will no longer be tolerated; nor will the extending of a stay ever be treated as a rubber-stamping exercise going forward. It provides a mechanism by which a defendant can seek the assistance of the court to progress a stagnant claim. Written by Simon O'Dwyer, barrister at Crown Office Chambers.

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—26 June 2025

This week’s edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes a Court of Appeal decision which held that it could enforce compliance with the pre-action protocol for low value road traffic accident claims. We also consider a High Court decision where claims by factory workers for contracting COVID-19 during the pandemic were reinstated. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other news, cases, webinars and New Law Journal articles of interest.

AI-driven fake evidence could play havoc in legal disputes

Law360, London: A recent High Court judgment exposed how nonexistent artificial intelligence-generated citations had been used in legal arguments—but experts say this could be the tip of the iceberg for increasingly sophisticated fake evidence making its way into disputes.

View PI & Clinical Negligence by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of case

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of caseA strike out order can be made either following an application by the parties or on the court's own initiative. This Practice Note deals with the scenario of the order being made following a party's application.Making an application

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an

What are the rules for validly serving a section 27 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 notice on the landlord

What are the rules for validly serving a section 27 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 notice on the landlord outside of the UK?There are various rules which govern when a section 27 notice can be served and what information needs to be included which are outside the scope of this Q&A. Notice may be
What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of case

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of case

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of caseA strike out order can be made either following an application by the parties or on the court's own initiative. This Practice Note deals with the scenario of the order being made following a party's application.Making an application

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an

What are the rules for validly serving a section 27 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 notice on the landlord

What are the rules for validly serving a section 27 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 notice on the landlord

What are the rules for validly serving a section 27 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 notice on the landlord outside of the UK?There are various rules which govern when a section 27 notice can be served and what information needs to be included which are outside the scope of this Q&A. Notice may be