Yoann Samuel Rabot v. Charlotte Victoria Hassam
Matthew David Briggs v. Boluwatife Laditan
and

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and The Motor Accident Solicitors Society
(Interveners)

Neutral Citation Number: [2023] EWCA Civ 19

Case No: CA-2022-001805; CA-2022-001806; CA-2022-001915

By Peter Causton

Hybrid Claims – Court of Appeal backs Claimants’ right to exclude non whiplash injuries
from tariff
The Court of Appeal has finally handed down its judgment on the correct approach to take to
hybrid whiplash and non whiplash claims, by a majority decision. This provides much needed
clarity to parties and insurers. The Master of the Rolls disagreed and sided with the
Defendants’ position that the intention of the reforms was to include non whiplash injuries in
the tariff. If his view had prevailed, damages recoverable in hybrid claims would have been
drastically reduced and taken away the Courts’ discretion to evaluate damages on the
principle of 100% recovery.
Fortunately for Claimants, the Court agreed that judges can carry on applying the common
law approach to assessment of non whiplash damages, only applying the tariff to whiplash
injuries. The correct approach to take is as follows:
It follows that the approach of the court to an assessment of damages in respect of a tariff and non-
tariff award where concurrently caused PSLA is present is that the courts should:
(i) assess the tariff award by reference to the Regulations;
(ii) assess the award for non-tariff injuries on common law principles; and
(iii) “step back” in order to carry out the Sadler adjustment, recognising that the sum included in the
tariff award for the whiplash component is unknown but is smaller than it would be if
damages for the whiplash component had been assessed applying common law principles.
This decision will come as a relief to Claimants and provide that they can claim 100% of their
damages when they are injured in a road traffic accident, except for whiplash injuries which
parliament has restricted.