The Actuary and the Law (Staple Inn Reading 2000)

2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-816
Author(s):  
L. Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Human Activity ◽  
Discount Rate ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
The Law ◽  
Future Loss

ABSTRACTThe lecture discusses the issue of actuarial evidence in personal injury cases, and how the courts have been diffident towards actuarial evidence and the utility and importance of actuarial expertise. Until recently lawyers have not understood the ways in which actuaries work with probabilities. The lecture then shows that now the law has adopted actuarial thinking in several significant ways, and in particular in damages and personal injury cases. The discount rate for calculating the multiplier for future loss is discussed, as is the new area of risk assessment and conditional fees. Lawyers need actuarial help where appropriate, and both face the daily problem of applying the laws of probability to human activity.

scholarly journals An Analysis of Inconsistent Methodology to Compute Permanent Future Nursing Care Costs in Personal Injury Claim

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohd Fuad Husaini ◽  
Kamaliah Salleh
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Care ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Judicial Activism ◽  
Compensation Scheme ◽  
Lump Sum ◽  
Underlying Basis ◽  
The Law ◽  
Future Loss ◽  
Care Costs ◽  
Apparent Problem

Restitutio in integrum has been the underlying basis of assessment for damages under the corrective compensation scheme of the law of tort. This doctrine commands restoration of the claimant to the pre-existing condition prior to the commission of the tort. While this basis of assessment has no apparent problem in respect of pecuniary part of the claimable damages in a personal injury claim, however, from another side of the spectrum, there is an inconsistent methodology as to how to precisely calculate the ‘price’ of pain or even future loss. As a result, judicial activism plays its part in promoting its creativity of solution to the problem, leading to inconsistent methodology on this spectrum of damages that bears diverse output. The objective of this paper is to highlight the flaws of the inconsistent methodology for the assessment of permanent future nursing care. The method used for this research is by tracing the relevant authorities that use the various methods of computing the multiplier and analysing the outcome of each method. The findings revealed anomalies of output as each method produces different output without any qualification on why a particular method is chosen. This flaw in the computation of the multiplier for future losses other than related to loss of earnings should not remain viable as there is no consistency of the output based on similar factual circumstances. One of the solutions for this debacle is to forgo lump sum payment altogether and move towards structured settlement payment.

scholarly journals Risk Assessment of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-106
Author(s):  
Monika Kardach ◽  
Paweł Fuć ◽  
Marta Galant ◽  
Marta Maciejewska
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Human Activity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Original Method ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
Aircraft Systems ◽  
Remotely Piloted Aircraft ◽  
Operating Instructions ◽  
Intensive Growth

Abstract The intensive growth in the popularity of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) used for recreational, sporting and other purposes, may lead to an increase in accidents and incidents involving them. Therefore, it is advisable to raise the awareness of all users, related to safety issues, to harmonize standards and procedures applicable at international and national level. The article presents the legal conditions for unmanned operations and the risk assessment methods used in areas of human activity. On this basis, an original method of risk assessment in unmanned systems was proposed. The method can be part of the operating instructions of the RPAS operator. At the end, final conclusions were drawn up.

Personal Injury Lawyer in NJ - The Law Offices of James C. DeZao

SciVee ◽  
2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Ponds ◽  
Jeremy Ponds
Keyword(s):  
Personal Injury ◽  
The Law

scholarly journals The influence of factor space on the value of discount rate in the assessment of investment projects

2018 ◽  
Vol 170 ◽  
pp. 01091
Author(s):  
Yuliya Anoshina ◽  
Valery Gusev ◽  
Svetlana Suchkova ◽  
Roman Gorshkov ◽  
Elena Smorodina
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Discount Rate ◽  
Construction Projects ◽  
Factor Space ◽  
Internal Environment ◽  
General Classification ◽  
Investment Projects ◽  
Rate Calculation

The purpose of the paper is to identify factor space influencing on the value of discount rate in the assessment of effectiveness of investment and construction projects. As a result of investigation, a general classification of investment and construction risks was drawn up, depending on influence of external and internal environment of the enterprise. The factor space, which is used for initial data of separate investment and construction projects, was identified. A general algorithm of risk assessment of investment and construction project is developed, taking into account the reasoned justification of the method used for discount rate calculation, with the possible application of the variable discount rate at different stages of project’s life cycle.

scholarly journals Deducting collateral benefits from damages: principle and policy

Legal Studies ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
The State ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Insurance Law ◽  
Personal Injury Litigation ◽  
Important Policy ◽  
Accident Victim ◽  
The Law

Schemes for compensating injury which operate alongside each other call for important policy decisions to be made concerning their inter-relationship. Are they to take account of one another and, if so, to what extent? These issues can arise in a variety of contexts. Within particular regimes they are the concern, for example, of the overlapping benefit regulations in social security law and the rules relating to contribution in insurance law. However, the focus of this article is upon personal injury litigation. It examines the policy reasons which have been used to justify the different results reached by the law when faced with the problem of ‘collateral benefits’ received by an accident victim also seeking damages. Typically, these benefits are received from the state, or an employer, or an insurer.

scholarly journals Compensation for harm caused by nuclear installations: what’s the damage?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-35
Author(s):  
Robert Lee ◽  
Radek Stech
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Property Damage ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

Purpose This paper aims to explain the changes to the liability regime for nuclear installations before reviewing the traditional heads of damage under the 1965 Act. It argues that while there is some welcome clarification of what amounts to an “occurrence” in the purposes of the 1965 Act, disappointingly, little has been done to clarify how concepts of personal injury and property damage under the Act sit alongside traditional tort notions leaving the law highly dependent on earlier, but not always consistent, case law. The paper then goes on to consider the impact of the new categories of compensation, introduced by the Order, evaluating the extent to which these draw upon EU law structures for environmental impairment liability. Again, it questions whether this approach will achieve sufficient clarity and certainty. Design/methodology/approach This paper is a desk-based legal research. Findings This study is a discussion of statutory material and case law. Originality/value This paper is a first in-depth treatment of changes to liability principles in the Nuclear Installations Act 1965.

In Our Image: Colonial Discourse and the Anglicization of the Law of Mandatory Palestine

1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assaf Likhovski
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Colonial Discourse ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Shoulder Blade

My story is full of holes. The first hole, or rather, ditch, was dug in 1930 by the municipality of Haifa. An Arab, Dr. Caesar Khoury, fell into the ditch and fractured his shoulder-blade.Could Dr. Khoury recover? The law of torts of mandatory Palestine was found in the Mejelle — an Ottoman code of Moslem civil law. Did the Mejelle provide a remedy in the case of personal injury? “Unfortunately,” said Judge Francis Baker, who delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court of Palestine, “the Mejelle dealt with liability for damages caused by animals to property, but it was ‘silent’ with regards to injuries caused to persons”. Therefore, Dr. Khoury could not recover.The second hole in my story belongs to a Jew, Feivel Danovitz. In 1939, Danovitz was run down by a truck in Tel Aviv. He sued the driver and the owner of the truck. The lower courts of Tel Aviv decided that if the Mejelle did not deal with liability for personal injury, that meant that there was a hole in the tort law of Palestine. Such a hole could be filled by recourse to the English common law in accordance with the provisions of Article 46 of the Palestine Order-in-Council, 1922. Since the English common law recognized liability for personal injury, Danovitz could recover.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document