Skip to main content
The Actuary: The magazine of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries - return to the homepage Logo of The Actuary website
  • Search
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on LinkedIn
  • Visit @TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Visit the website of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries Logo of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries

Main navigation

  • News
  • Features
    • General Features
    • Interviews
    • Students
    • Opinion
  • Topics
  • Knowledge
    • Business Skills
    • Careers
    • Events
    • Predictions by The Actuary
    • Whitepapers
    • Moody's - Climate Risk Insurers series
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
  • Jobs
  • IFoA
    • CEO Comment
    • IFoA News
    • People & Social News
    • President Comment
  • Archive
Quick links:
  • Home
  • The Actuary Issues
  • June 2020
People & Social News

June: Letters page

Open-access content Thursday 4th June 2020

Letters

Setting a precedent

This year will see the 25th anniversary of the case of Stevenson v Sweeney (1995 SLT 20), which was heard in the Court of Session in Edinburgh by Lord Morton of Shuna in the autumn of 1995.

In this case, damages of £318,327 were awarded for the cost of future care for the 19-year-old pursuer [plaintiff], who had suffered serious head injuries in a car accident which resulted in him being unable to look after himself and requiring care for the remainder of his life. These damages were assessed by using a multiplier of 20, which was at the time the highest multiplier ever used by a court in the UK. This level of multiplier was accepted by the court on the basis of actuarial projections that I prepared for the solicitors acting for the pursuer, Digby Brown, and which they submitted as evidence.

I understood at the time that this was the first time actuarial evidence was accepted by a court anywhere in the UK. I would be interested to know if any other actuary knows of an earlier case where actuarial evidence was accepted.  

There certainly were earlier cases where actuarial evidence was rejected by the judge. Mitchell v Glenrothes Development Corporation in 1987 was one, and in an earlier case in England the judge famously remarked that he would prefer to accept the evidence of an astrologer rather than an actuary.  

I was told sometime later that it was the Sweeney case that established the precedent that actuarial evidence was acceptable to the UK courts, and as we approach the 25th anniversary of the hearing I would certainly like to know if this was indeed the case.

Peter A Wylie

18 April 2020

image.jpeg
This article appeared in our June 2020 issue of The Actuary.
Click here to view this issue
Also filed in
People & Social News

You might also like...

Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Deputy Head of Capital Modelling

London (Central)
£110000 - £130000 per annum
Reference
144789

Head of Analytics (Actuarial)

London (Central)
£130000 - £165000 per annum
Reference
144788

Pensions Actuarial Analyst - GMP Equalisation

London (Central)
£ dependent upon experience
Reference
143745
See all jobs »
 
 

Today's top reads

 
 

Sign up to our newsletter

News, jobs and updates

Sign up

Subscribe to The Actuary

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
Spread-iPad-slantB-june.png

Topics

  • Data Science
  • Investment
  • Risk & ERM
  • Pensions
  • Environment
  • Soft skills
  • General Insurance
  • Regulation Standards
  • Health care
  • Technology
  • Reinsurance
  • Global
  • Life insurance
​
FOLLOW US
The Actuary on LinkedIn
@TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Facebook: The Actuary Magazine
CONTACT US
The Actuary
Tel: (+44) 020 7880 6200
​

IFoA

About IFoA
Become an actuary
IFoA Events
About membership

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to The Actuary Magazine
Contribute

The Actuary Jobs

Actuarial job search
Pensions jobs
General insurance jobs
Solvency II jobs

© 2023 The Actuary. The Actuary is published on behalf of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries by Redactive Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ