文章基本信息

标题：The Fallacy of Consistency in Assessing Permanent Future Loss in a Personal Injury Claim: The Malaysian Practice Dilemma
本地全文：下载
作者：Mohd Fuad Husaini
期刊名称：International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
电子版ISSN：2222-6990
出版年度：2019
卷号：9
期号：7
页码：714-725
DOI：10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i7/6163
语种：English
出版社：Human Resource Management Academic Research Society
摘要：Damages under the law of tort as applied in Malaysia is based on corrective compensation scheme under the principle of restitutio in integrum. The principle lays that the purpose of damage is to restore the plaintiff to its original position if the tort had not been committed. Whilst this principle lays no apparent problem in its implementation; however, in the realm of calculating damages for future losses, the Courts have adopted an assortment of calculations and assessment. The dependency and future loss of earnings are regulated by the statutory provisions in the form of Section 7(3)(c) and 28A(2)(c) of the Civil Law Act, 1956 respectively. However, other future losses such as permanent future nursing care have been left in vain to the extent that the Courts seem to recognize 5 distinct multipliers for calculating permanent future nursing care, which bears contrasting results. Even the current Civil Law (Amendment) Act, 2019 has still not addressed this issue. The need for a consistent methodology is crucial as justice demands that a similar standard is applied to all parties in order to achieve a consistent outcome for the like cases. The law cannot treat like cases with different outcome. This paper highlights the fallacy that there is a consistent standard in assessing continuing and permanent future loss in a personal injury claim, especially with regards to nursing care and medical expenses; which in turn results in contrasting outcomes.