Publication - Research and analysis

Civil Law of Damages: Issues in Personal Injury - Analysis of Written Consultation Responses

Published: 6 Aug 2013
Part of:
Research
ISBN:
9781782567844

Analysis of Written Consultation Responses

69 page PDF

680.0 kB

69 page PDF

680.0 kB

Contents
Civil Law of Damages: Issues in Personal Injury - Analysis of Written Consultation Responses
Footnotes

69 page PDF

680.0 kB

Footnotes

1. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/350

2. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/237

3. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/393

4. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2011/7/contents

5. Carnegie v Lord Advocate (2001). The Carnegie approach would result in a pursuer who could establish that the emergence of a further injury was wholly separate and distinct to an earlier injury would have the right to raise an action for the later injury even if they had not done so for the earlier injury.

6. Aitchison v Glasgow City Council (2010). In this case, the argument was that following a delictual act, a single cause of action arises, in which all associated damages must be sought.

7. Here and elsewhere, s.19A refers to s.19A of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973.

8. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/350

9. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/237

10. The report is available at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/393

11. The consultation non-confidential responses can be viewed at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/08/5509

12. The "Alcock criteria" are derived from the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (1992).

13. Scottish Law Commission (2007). Personal injury actions: limitation and prescribed claims. Scots Law Commission report no. 207.

14. In Aitchison v Glasgow City Council (2010) the Lord President, sitting as part of a bench of five senior judges concluded that Carnegie had been wrongly decided and that in fact, Scots law had always been as the Commission recommends it should be.

15. The Policy Memorandum and Explanatory Memorandum (including the Financial Memorandum) associated with the 2007 Act are available at www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/Bills/24941.aspx. (Technically, the provisions of the 2007 Act were repealed in July 2011 by the Damages (Scotland) Act 2011, but in substance they were continued thereafter by section 5 of the 2011 Act.)

16. The Policy Memorandum and Explanatory Memorandum (including the Financial Memorandum) associated with the 2009 Act are available at www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/Bills/16218.aspx

17. While the 2009 Act came into force on 17 June 2009, it provided (i) that period between 17 October 2007 and that date should be "left out of account" for limitation purposes (i.e. that the running of the time-bar clock should effectively be treated as having been frozen for that 18 month period) and (ii) that its central provisions should be "treated for all purposes as having always had effect".

18. The Policy Memorandum and Explanatory Memorandum (including the Financial Memorandum) associated with the 2011 Act are available at www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/Bills/18113.aspx.

19. The Commission's report can be found at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/385.

20. The consultation paper can be found at http://scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/01/15144204/0; the summary and analysis of responses at www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/05/16121025/1; and the (non-confidential) responses at www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/05/15104808/0.


Contact

Email: Ria Phillips