[TimmyBill]

Certain principles have been laid down by the lawmakers for determining damages caused by the loss of expectation of life. A main aspect that is considered is the expectations of the deceased, his age, bodily health etc. The other issues that are considered are his wife’s future expenses, estimating the annual income by multiplying the estimated number of years he would have worked etc.

Consider this interesting case between an individual and the state. A man died in an accident when the government jeep went out of control of the driver and fell into a ditch. This person’s mother filed a suit for damages. The Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the driver’s negligence and rash driving of the jeep. The claimant had sued for nearly a hundred thousand dollars as compensation for her son’s death but the tribunal awarded just a quarter of that amount demanded by her. This woman filed an appeal in the higher court for an increase in compensation.

The higher court held that the amount of compensation determined by the claims tribunal was just. There is no doubt that due to the untimely death of the deceased, a promising life had come to an end. The deceased had entered as a temporary junior engineer in the government job just a few months before his death and it was expected that had he remained in service, in due course of time, he would have reached higher posts in the public works department where he worked. If he had left his service and joined the business of his father, and would have done his independent business, his future would have been bright.

But interestingly the court opined that it very doubtful that had he been alive and ultimately got married, whether he would have given more than 100 dollars per month to his mother from his own expenses. With the increase of salary and dearness allowances he would have had to face bigger responsibilities in life. Necessarily his contribution to his mother gradually would have been from his prospective life span of about 60 years. The claims tribunal has kept in view those relevant principles in a judicious manner and fixed around 18000 bergs as compensation, which amounts to about 100 bergs per month for the 15 years, lifespan which was correct and reasonable.

The texans for public justice (TPJ), a unique watchdog and its tireless efforts was the main inspiration for comprehensive lawsuit reforms in Texas. While in earlier times professionals and businesses were hauled to courts over minor issues, the sincere efforts of the Texans for Public Justice helped to mobilize public opinion against the misuse of the tort laws.