Knauer (Widower And Administrator Of The Estate Of Sally Ann Knauer) V Ministry Of Justice

Multipliers for loss of dependency in fatal claims to be calculated from the date of trial, not the date of death

On 24 February 2016, a unanimous seven Justice Supreme Court, departed from long established principles and ruled that damages for future loss of dependency in fatal injury claims should be calculated from the date of trial, rather than the date of death. This change has been anticipated since 1999 when the Law Commission published its report on Claims for Wrongful Death, and it brings the law in England and Wales in line with the approach adopted in Scotland since the enactment of the Damages (Scotland) Act 2011. This method of calculating damages was recommended in the 7th Edition of the Ogden Tables (paragraph 64 onwards of the explanatory notes), and should now be applied.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court commented that the precedent set down in the cases of Cookson1 and Dodds2 came from an era when the calculation of damages for personal injury and death was less sophisticated, and applying these principles in the current climate was outdated and unscientific. While the new approach is arguably a more reasonable method of calculating damages, insurers should note that it will result in higher dependency awards, and an increase in case reserves. However, the change is limited to fatal cases only, and therefore, will affect a small number of claims, most notably those involving young dependent children. In all existing fatal claims, Part 36 Offers should now be reviewed.

Facts

The present case involved a claim brought by the widower of Mrs Knauer, a prison officer, who died of mesothelioma in 2009, aged 46, after exposure to asbestos at Guy's Marsh Prison in Dorset. Liability was admitted in December 2013, and the case proceeded before Bean J in July 2014, on an assessment of damages only. The value of the income and services lost as a result of the death (the "multiplicand"), was agreed, and at issue was whether the number of years by which that figure was to be multiplied (the "multiplier") was to be calculated from the date of death, or from the date of trial. The difference between the two approaches in this case was around £50,000 (or 10% of the total award).

Interestingly, the trial judge commented that while he was bound to follow the Cookson principles, he would have preferred the approach recommended by the Law Commission, of calculating the multiplier from the date of trial. In what is clearly indicative of the...