It seems that it took a Japanese insurer, Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Company, to concentrate the minds of English lawyers to researching the question: what would be the quantum of damages awarded in each Member State for an identical injury? The result of the researches carried out by solicitors well known in the area of personal injury litigation (particularly mass claims) is this “Industry Report” of 192 pages, which is broken down into an introductory text of 10 or so pages followed by lists of calculations on a country-by-country basis. The details were provided by lawyers in each country and they vary considerably not merely in quantum but also in the amount of information given. Crucially the work is concerned only with the level of damages that might be awarded and not with the grounds of legal liability.

The basis of comparison was to take two hypothetical victims. The first was a 40-year-old doctor with a wife and two children and the second was a female medical student aged 20 years with no dependants. While it is readily admitted that there is no “classic” victim, it does seem a little strange to this reviewer that a student should be chosen rather than perhaps a manual worker. A medical professional and a would-be medical professional seem to limit the ambit of the comparisons unnecessarily.

The comparisons range from instant death through a wide variety of injuries such as quadriplegia, paraplegia, blindness and various degrees of amputations. Apart from the wide range of awards, forum shopping, where possible, would also be dictated by the domestic law affecting liability, about which the present work was not concerned. Two examples are, however, given. For instance, in the United Kingdom and Ireland there is no limit on the amount of damages awarded in road traffic cases, whereas in most other Member States limits can be introduced. On the other hand, in Germany the Medical Drug Law does not allow a development risk defence under the Product Liability Directive (85/374/EEC), which other Member States have allowed.

In addition to the country-by-country tables setting out the levels of award applicable under the various headings, there is a short Explanatory Note highlighting any unusual aspects of the various countries’ approach to quantum. These explanations bring out the differences between English awards and the country in question. Thus, in Ireland actuaries are used in the assessment and bereavement damages can be awarded to the parents even though the student was aged 20 years. Denmark comes low down on the table of awards but this is explained by the fact that there is little private medical care available to cause the award to reach the high levels that apply in England. In addition, homosexual partners are entitled to an award. In France, siblings as well as the parents of the student victim would be entitled to bereavement damages. Although total damages are similar in size under most headings, the calculation formula is very different in France. Structured settlements are said to be more common. It is probably true to say that, since publication in late 1990, such settlements are starting to increase in England, as greater media publicity has been given and lawyers begin to realize the advantages to both parties. Awards in Greece are at the lower end of the scale, largely reflecting the lower income levels of the two hypothetical victims in the study, although in Greece the parents of the student would receive one of the highest awards of all EC Members (£17,654). Greece also pays out on a monthly basis in most circumstances. Contingency fees are possible, with a limit of 20% of the award. Italy, which tends to award high compensation, was seen as the country which provides the greatest variation with England. Regional differences within Italy were seen as so great that two reports under