The case confirms that gratuitous care damages are assessed at market rates including live-in allowances regardless of whether care is provided by family, but that a parent's attendance at hospital during a period of unconsciousness may be more appropriately compensated as general damages rather than under Griffiths v Kerkemeyer where the evidence of the need for outside care is insufficient. Future gratuitous care is assessed at the 3% discount rate while future commercial care uses the 5% statutory rate. Courts may direct payment of past care damages to the gratuitous care provider where this is in the plaintiff's interest.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.