Double recovery

jjj820jjj820
in Baer.Intro

Hi Graham,

For Glynn v Scottish Union & National case: Glynn is injured and tries to double-recover his losses. Courts say no because double-recovery violates the principle of indemnity.

Does it contradict the collateral source rule (in Harris.Tort): evidence of plaintiff's collateral source of compensation need not be entered at trial. Here double recovery is allowed.

If the principle of indemnity can be applied to all cases, why bother removing collateral source in tort reform?

Thank you.

Comments

  • grahamgraham

    That's a good observation and I do not have a good answer. Laws evolve over a long period of time and it's very possible to have contradictory laws on the books. This seems to be an example of that and the ruling in any given case depends on the judge's interpretation. The original ruling permitted Glynn to receive double-recovery (because of the collateral source rule) but this was overturned on appeal, presumably under a different judge (who felt the principle of indemnity was more important in this situation.)

    I'm not sure why the collateral source rule even exists because it clearly violates the principle of indemnity.

    The fact that you noticed this means you're seeing connections between different readings and that's a very good sign that you're learning the material very well!

  • jjj820jjj820

    Thank you Graham !

  • bkmlocksbkmlocks

    Just adding my grain of salt :) The collateral source rule is not always applicable and its usually reserved for two specific scenarios:

    If money received comes from:
    1) Donations/Gifts/Charity etc
    2) Private insurance (mostly disability)

    The first exception makes sense since without the collateral source rule, the donation is just worthless since the injured does not receive any additional compensation.

    The second exception also makes sense in my opinion since it incentivizes people to also get covered for additional private insurance. Its just a way to reward someone for being thoughtful and risk averse enough to buy private insurance.

    In summary, I think in most cases the principle of indemnity is respected (no double recovery) except in those

    https://oatleyvigmond.com/collateral-benefits-what-is-deductible-what-isnt/

  • grahamgraham

    Very interesting @bkmlocks. I didn't know about those exceptions but they do make sense.

  • jjj820jjj820

    Thanks for the info, bkmlocks !

Sign In or Register to comment.