The claimant had recovered damages, but was ordered to pay costs since she had recovered less than was paid in. She appealed.
Held: There were anomalies in the system with regard to the recoverable social security benefits. The sums recoverable were not reduced in line with any reduction for contributory negligence, benefits could be recovered for time periods for which no award was made, and the benefits could be set off against a wider range of sums. The calculation upon which the costs decision must therefore be made to reflect no more than the amount appropriate for the head of damages against which the benefits could be offset. There remained difficulties which the court should deal with within its discretion.
Citations:
Times 25-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 365
Links:
Statutes:
Civil Procedure Rules 36.20, Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 8
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Geoffrey Chatwin v Janice Lowther CA 21-May-2003
The case concerned the meaning of the phrase ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as it applied to self employed persons.
Held: The fact that a person’s accounts described fees as turnover, did not prevent them being still earnings within the Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury, Benefits, Damages
Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180364