Report comment

It seems that there's a few folk who aren't familiar with Odysseus's taunting of Polyphemus.

As to 17:59 I am afraid that the proposal is complete guff.

People assert their rights when it is effective so to do. Let us have a little thought experiment, the claimant a cyclist suffers a below the knee amputation of his left leg with associated financial losses.

1. In jurisdiction one he can recover general damages and past and future special damages and costs from the liable party.

2. In jurisdiction two he can recover general damages and specials but no costs, and the costs are likely to result in de minimis financial recovery.

3. In jurisdiction three there is no recovery of damages just the payment of state benefits.

The claimant will almost certainly pursue the claim in jurisdiction one, may in J2 if he has a funding vehicle which will not almost wholly erode any potential settlement and no one will pursue anything in J3.

The system for awarding £compo for w/l varies massively across the EU, the payments in Eire make our level of general damages look miserly and yes there are countries which award less (and therefore have far fewer claims).

If you doubt the credibility of the thought experiment ask this, how may cases for business debt, breach of contract etc are pursued where the claim is for say £250? Virtually nil as it is not costs effective to bring the claim, but the absence of a volume of claims is not evidence of the absence of an enormous number of unsatisfied invoices & etc.