Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2024 #196Mrs Justice Theis DBE was concerned with the appeal by CL (the appellant) from the order of HHJ Porter-Bryant dated 6 December 2023 (Swansea Bay University Health Board v P [2023]) which discharged a previous order appointing the appellant as LL’s deputy for personal welfare. The appellant was LL’s mother. The respondents to the appeal were the Swansea Bay University Health Board (the first respondent), LL by his litigation friend AB (the second respondent), LL’s father (the third respondent) and Swansea City Council (the fourth respondent). The fourth respondent took no active ...
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2024 #196The applicant, who was the deputy for both respondents, sought the guidance of the court as to how to approach the issue of whether to inform a protected party (P) of the value of their civil litigation settlement. The essence of the issue was whether the respondents had the capacity to understand the value of their personal injury funds and appreciate the extent to which wider knowledge of their assets may render them vulnerable. If not, a ‘best interests’ decision was required to be taken as to whether they should be told the size of their funds. At present there was no guidance from t...
Deirdre Goodwin examines the pitfalls in quantifying brain injury claims ‘Careful investigation is required of the claimant’s pre-accident employment, not only evidenced by payslips but – in respect of the future – the likely career trajectory.’ This is a time of rapid change: the discount rate, appropriate accommodation claims methodology, as well as significant advances …
Continue reading "Brain injury: Challenges for claimants"
This post is only available to members.
