Key Facts
- •Judicial review of a First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) decision concerning the interpretation of paragraph 42 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2001.
- •The applicant sought compensation for various expenses, including house adaptation costs, trust administration costs, and Court of Protection costs.
- •The case hinged on the interpretation of "other resultant losses" in paragraph 42(b) of the 2001 Scheme.
- •The applicant argued that "other" meant "other than" loss of parental services, while the CICA contended it meant "other losses resulting from" the loss of parental services.
Legal Principles
Statutory interpretation: Words should be given their ordinary meaning unless a specific legal meaning is intended.
Applicant's submissions
Statutory interpretation: A statute should be interpreted holistically, considering the context of the entire provision and the scheme as a whole.
CICA's submissions and Judge's analysis
Judicial Review: The Upper Tribunal reviews decisions of the lower Tribunal for errors of law.
Introduction and Conclusion
Outcomes
The judicial review was dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal Judge found that "other resultant losses" in paragraph 42(b) referred to losses resulting from the loss of parental services, not any loss incurred after the death of the deceased. The claimed costs (house adaptation, trust administration, Court of Protection) were not considered resultant losses from the loss of parental services.