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

Event to mark the 25th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee and to launch the work of the Online Procedure Rule Committee

On 16 July 2025, the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Birss gave speeches at an event hosted by the Ministry of Justice and The Law Society. The event marked the 25th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) and launched the public engagement work carried out by the Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC).

When employment duties extend beyond the clock—employer liability and Sanderson orders (Pashamov v Taylor & another)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: A farm worker suffered serious injuries when he was struck by a car when crossing the road. The claimant had been travelling back from the field to his lodgings on a company bus and had left the bus to tell employees on the other side of the road to get on. The judge dismissed the claim against the car driver, but the worker succeeded against his employer. The judge held that he had been engaged in activities incidental to his employment. The judge made a Sanderson order against the employer. It was ordered to pay both the driver’s costs and the costs the claimant had incurred against the driver in turn. Written by David Juckes, barrister at Hailsham Chambers.

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—24 July 2025

This week’s edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes the Civil Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2025, SI 2025/893, which update procedures for the CE-File electronic case system. The NHS published its annual report and accounts for 2024/25, revealing that 83% of clinical compensation claims were resolved out of court, with over 11,000 settled via alternative dispute resolution. We take a look at silicosis claims, focusing on the risks of prolonged exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) and employer liability. We also feature a recent High Court decision that found the claimant was responsible for his own injuries during a snowmobile accident. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other news, cases, webinars and New Law Journal articles of interest.

Transparency and Open Justice Board publishes finalised open justice objectives for courts

The Transparency and Open Justice Board has published its finalised Key Objectives in July 2025, following a consultation process initiated in December 2024. These objectives were approved at the Board’s meeting and the Board has concurrently issued its formal response to the engagement received. The next phase will involve all Courts and Tribunals evaluating their current practices against these objectives. Where practices fall short, institutions will be required to develop change programmes aimed at achieving compliance.

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

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

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

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements[Insert addressee details]Dear [insert name][It is our understanding that [insert name of prospective employee] [was an employee of yours between the dates of [insert dates as appropriate] OR is a current employee of
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

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

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

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements

Template for regulatory references given by SMCR firms and disclosure requirements[Insert addressee details]Dear [insert name][It is our understanding that [insert name of prospective employee] [was an employee of yours between the dates of [insert dates as appropriate] OR is a current employee of