Most damages claimed for personal injury are general damages, for pain and suffering etc. They have nothing to do with losses suffered. Some personal injuries claims also claim for special damages, which are what choc chip is talking about - pecuniary losses. But it is 100% wrong to day that "If there are no losses, there is no claim".
Pain and suffering is a loss though. It is a form damage just not financial damage. There is so much on this thread that is legally wrong which is the danger of listening to strangers on the internet.
An essential part of a negligence claim is damage but damage would encompass pain and suffering. If the Claimant (here OPs child who as has been pointed out is a minor) also suffers quantifiable financial damage that could also be part of the claim but pain and suffering is equally damage.
@ShopAccident you must get your child assessed for concussion as soon as possible.
@ChocChipHandbag
@ThoseDamnCrows I defend these claims on behalf of insurers for a living!
There are other types of financial loss in addition to loss of earnings, plus smallish fixed amounts for "Pain and suffering" where an injury is more than superficial. Surprise surprise, it's quite complicated. Don't be so rude.
Although big claims with loss of earnings and pension etc can be complicated to calculated, the basic principles are not complicated at all so stop trying to pretend they are. All foreseeable loss and damage caused by a negligence is recoverable - this is in two parts (1) general damages - a court assessed amount for pain suffering and loss of amenity and (2) special damages which is quantifiable financial loss caused by the injury. This itself is divided into past losses and future losses. These can include things like loss of earnings, cost of aids or adaptations due to the injury; cost of treatment if it is paid for; damage to property (crashed car for example or damaged clothes or glasses); cost of care or assistance during recovery.
It is also rubbish to say there are "smallish fixed amounts for pain and suffering".
There are guidelines specifically the Judicial College Guidelines 16th Ed (which are just that guidelines - guidelines for a Judge assessing damage to take into account) not "fixed amounts" for pain and suffering. The worse the injury and the more serious the consequences the larger the award.
For example (Very obviously not this case but I mention it as an illustration of why it's nonsense to say you only get smallish fixed amounts for pain, suffering and loss of amenity) Section (A) - Injury Resulting from Brain Damage (a) Very Severe the guideline range for pain suffering and loss of amenity (also known as general damages) is £282,010 to £403,990 which on any view is not 'a small fixed amount"
The trouble with writing nonsense like this is that other people with other serious injuries may read it and be completely misled into thinking they have no claim worth anything and it's not worth even exploring it.
The bottom end of the brain/head injury scale is e) Minor Injury where brain damage, if any, will have been minimal. The Court takes into account
- (i)the severity of the initial injury;
- (ii)the period taken to recover from any symptoms;
- (iii)the extent of continuing symptoms;
- (iv)the presence or absence of headaches.
The bottom of the bracket will reflect full recovery within a few weeks.
The guideline range is
£2,210 to £12,770
There is a separate section in the guidelines for minor injuries which for injuries where there is a complete recovery within seven days gives a range of a few hundred pounds to £690.
All of this is very fact dependent on the facts of particular case, the nature of the injury, the long term symptoms and the loss of amenity of a particular claimant.
So a tennis obsessed boy who breaks his arm and misses his once in a life time opportunity to be a ball boy at the Wimbledon final which he is desperate to do and was looking forward hugely to has a greater loss of amenity than one who breaks his arm who doesn't play sport and is only mildly inconvenienced.