Report comment

Aiming at s2(4) is odd, as the vast majority of damages in the largest claims are for social care rather than medical care. It's Peters v West Midlands SHA that made it clear that availability of social care/direct payments can not be relied upon by Defendants to escape their liability to pay damages.

In my experience, very few cases have a large medical care element. Even for those Claimants who are very seriously injured and require 24 hour care, it's not usually nursing care that is required.

Having said that, the NHSLA does seem to struggle with the Peters decision; I've had several counter schedules long after Peters that still argue the Claimant should use "free" local authority services in order to mitigate their loss. Each time I've asked whether they intend to take the case we're dealing with to the Supreme Court in order to challenge the decision in Peters, and each time there has been silence in reply...