What then can we take from these recent cases?
Firstly notwithstanding the brevity of pleadings envisaged by
Chapter 43 procedure the pursuer is still required to set out his
case in sufficient detail to give fair notice of the heads of claim
he is looking for and how they are to be made up. This requirement
is even more important where the pursuer is looking for a jury
trial and it is preferable that the pleadings are detailed enough
to allow the jury to work out what is being asked for without
having to make reference to other documents.
Cases where future earnings are a significant head of claim and
the prospects in that regard are uncertain or conflicting resulting
in many different possible scenarios which will require the
decision maker to both absorb and weigh up complex evidence and
then, having decided on the most likely future path for the pursuer
calculate the appropriate damages with reference to the intricacies
of the Ogden Tables might well be seen as outwith the capability of
a jury given the constraints of time, direction and information
within which they traditionally operate.
On a wider note the question of whether jury trials are still an
effective and justifiable forum for dealing with today's
increasingly complex personal injury claims is something that is
being given careful consideration in the ongoing civil justice
review and we will of course keep you updated of any progress in
that regard.