Tort law in practice: appearance and reality in reforming periodical payments of damages
Paying damages for personal injury in the form of a lump sum is again under attack. Almost twenty years ago the concept of a structured settlement was first used in the UK in order to provide continuing lifetime payments for seriously injured claimants. However, the idea was slow to develop. Proposals for a structure were easily defeated if either of the parties objected. To counter this, recent legislation has removed this veto: taking into account the needs of the claimant, a judge can make a periodical payments order even if it is against the wishes of both parties. 
 
This article looks at the impact of this reform upon the settlement system and the bargaining power of the parties. The relationship between the new legislative regime and that involving structured settlements is examined. The reform is set in its wider political and economic context. In particular, it is shown to be based, firstly, on an inadequate assessment of the problems caused to insurers, and secondly, on excessive concern about the impact of litigation upon National Health Service budgets. Deferring the full payment of damages to later years is politically attractive, and gives the state an interest in the form in which damages are paid. This was insufficiently acknowledged in the reasons given for the reform. There are sharp differences between the surface appearance of the legislation and the realities of practice.
A comparative study of fundamental rights in South Africa and Ireland with specific emphasis on human dignity
All material supplied by Trinity College Library is protected by copyright (under the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 as amended) and other relevant Intellectual Property Rights. By accessing and using a Digitised Thesis from Trinity College Library you acknowledge that all Intellectual Property Rights in any Works supplied are the sole and exclusive property of the copyright and/or other I PR holder. Specific copyright holders may not be explicitly identified. Use of materials from other sources within a thesis should not be construed as a claim over them.
Insurers' Agreements Not to Enforce Strict Legal Rights: Bargaining with Government and in the Shadow of the Law
This article is concerned with insurers making agreements not to enforce their legal rights and thereby reducing in importance certain areas of the law of insurance. These agreements are of two kinds: the first is made between insurers themselves, usually with the object of avoiding the uncertainties of legal rules and the expense of obtaining court judgments; the second kind are undertakings given by insurers to government often so as to forestall official criticism and discourage legislation which might otherwise openly regulate their industry. Both types of agreement have received only very limited attention from writers on insurance law.The article illustrates that the operation of the legal process may not be fully revealed by study only of those public and visible rules which govern the rights between insurers, government and the public. Private agreements. which may not even amount to legally enforceable contracts, are one of the less visible factors that can transform the surface appearance of the legal system.