Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-qks25 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T12:26:11.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 The Legal Attitude in Assessing Damages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2023

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Other
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Total loss of hearing (young girl of 12): £32,000 was the suggested figure by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (19 June 1984) but this is in a different category altogether. The Board also suggested £450 for an undisplaced nasal fracture and £700 if displaced, £2,750 for rape and £12,000 for loss of one eye. The quantum of damages in Berry was based on an earlier case Ashcroft v Curtin [1971], 1 WLR 1731, Court of Appeal, a motor accident case. Hearing loss was less than in Berry, but the awards are similar. Circumstances were different. Compensation tends to be higher in accident cases.

[2] W.G. Noble studied the men in detail: “The men don't give very much away, although on the other hand, there may not be all that much to give away. They seem to be a fairly balanced lot, within a rather narrow range of interests. Aware of the monotony of their job they do, however, get some satisfaction out of earning their livelihood and doing a day's work. They live quiet lives … Perhaps hearing loss does not matter all that much since they do not seem to make any great demands on life. A quiet life is the aim … not Living Theatre. One question is whether this quietness’ would be a natural feature of people like these or whether they have become so because of hearing loss.”