Volume 1

Report / Royal Commission on Civil Liability and Compensation for Personal Injury.

  • Great Britain. Royal Commission on Civil Liability and Compensation for Personal Injury.
Date:
1978
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Report / Royal Commission on Civil Liability and Compensation for Personal Injury. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    129/568 (page 111)
    additions to disablement benefit should be divided between the categories according to their function. Under the present law, constant attendance allow- ance is disregarded; all the other allowances are treated as part of disablement benefit, and taken into account in assessing damages for loss of earnings. We think that hospital treatment allowance, which brings a disablement pension up to the 100 per cent level when the recipient is in hospital, should be deducted from damages for non-pecuniary loss, and all the other allowances allocated to loss of income or expenses. 491 All the benefits listed in the previous paragraph should in our view be fully taken into account. But special considerations apply to unemployment benefit, invalid care allowance, supplementary benefit, and family income supplement. 492 When as a result of the injury the plaintiff is unemployed and receives unemployment benefit the benefit diminishes the plaintiff’s loss of income and so should be set off against it. But as unemployment benefit is payable only if the claimant is fit for work, we doubt whether the question of offset would often arise. One possible example might be where a man was not able to do his job as well as before because of an injury, and was made redundant although he was still fit for work. 493 Invalid care allowance is a taxable non-contributory benefit which is payable to men or single women who are unable to go out to work because they have to look after a severely disabled relative receiving attendance allowance or constant attendance allowance. It is in a different category from the other benefits because it is not payable to the plaintiff but to the person who is looking after him. In chapter 12, we considered how damages for services rendered by others should be assessed; we concluded that there could be no fixed rule which would be fair in every case; and that compensation should be assessed by the court on the basis of what was reasonable. We cannot therefore make specific provision for offsetting invalid care allowance; but we think that the payment of this allowance is one factor which should be taken into account by the court when assessing damages for the plaintiff’s need for services. 494 Supplementary benefit received up to the date of the award diminishes the plaintiff’s loss and should be deducted in the assessment of damages for past loss of income. But, after the award, the plaintiff will have his damages and these will be taken into account in deciding whether he is eligible for supple- mentary benefit. We think it follows that, in assessing the damages for future loss of income, supplementary benefit should not be taken into account. The same considerations apply to family income supplement. 495 Finally, we propose in chapter 27 the introduction of an allowance for all severely handicapped children, payable as an addition to child benefit. The majority of us think that it would be right to regard the new allowance as a benefit intended to compensate for expenses. By a majority, we recommend that the proposed allowance for severely handicapped children should be set off against damages for expenses, where a child succeeds in a tort claim for the injury which caused his handicap.