Description
In a low value RTA involving a child, the cost of a psychiatrist's report would be disallowed on the basis that the claimant's representative should have considered what was the most appropriate report to obtain first.
C, a six year old child, recovered £1,400 in general damages following a road traffic accident. He suffered general trauma, which was expected to resolve within six months, and had received five sessions of psychotherapy. Costs were agreed, save for a psychiatrist's report costing £1,086 submitted on behalf of C. It was the first medical report obtained by C; was of a general character; and, made no specific diagnosis of psychiatric trauma. C subsequently obtained an orthopaedic report.
D submitted that the psychiatrist's report should not have been obtained and that the fee for the orthopaedic report was a sufficient amount to spend on medical reports. C argued that paragraph 7.4 of the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents provided that a medical report should always be obtained and that on receipt the claimant's representative should consider whether a second report was required.
The court held that paragraph 7.4 was broadly drafted and should not be interpreted so as to contradict CPR, r.44.4 (on the recoverability of costs). The claimant's representative should have planned in advance what medical evidence to obtain. Had that been done, a psychiatrist's report would not have been obtained first.
