Written evidence from the Medical Defence Union told us that Section 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 is based on a recommendation made in 1946, two years before the establishment of the NHS, which was caveated that it “might need to be radically altered if a comprehensive health service is introduced”.70 Evidence from The Medical Protection Society and the Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland suggested that repealing the Act would save the NHS money that could be r...

Written evidence from the Medical Defence Union told us that Section 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 is based on a recommendation made in 1946, two years before the establishment of the NHS, which was caveated that it “might need to be radically altered if a comprehensive health service is introduced”.70 Evidence from The Medical Protection Society and the Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland suggested that repealing the Act would save the NHS money that could be reinvested into frontline care.71 However, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers raised concerns that removing the presumption of private care would Type: conclusion | Number: 27 | Response status: response_pending Government response: The government is keeping this under consideration. Target implementation date: to be advised. 6.2 The existing system requires judges to disregard the availability of NHS services when assessing damages for personal injury. This means claimants are able to cla