No Fault Compensation Review GroupReport and RecommendationsVolume ICommissioned by The Scottish GovernmentSt Andrews HouseRegent RoadEdinburghEH1 3DGForewordWe were asked by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing to consider the potential benefits for patients in Scotland of a no fault compensation scheme for injuries resulting from medical treatment, and whether such a scheme should be introduced alongside the existing clinical negligence arrangements.Our report sets out the approach we adopted together with our findings, conclusions and recommendations which we hope will be helpful and inform consideration of what is required to ensure that the compensation scheme in operation in Scotland meets the needs of those involved. This is an extremely complex area and there are, of course, a wide number of interests at stake. The Review Group has been fortunate to have representation from many of these interested parties in its membership and I have been impressed with the commitment and enthusiasm that members have shown throughout our deliberations and I am extremely grateful for this support. We adopted a strategy which proactively utilised the unique expertise of members to inform both our discussions and the development of our recommendations. We were also fortunate to be able to consult other experts as and when this was appropriate and I am also happy to acknowledge this assistance which was immensely helpful to us. The original report was submitted in November but did not include costings for the introduction of a no-fault scheme. The research team has now provided advice, and the report offers comments on this in Chapter 7 paragraph 7.14. Finally, my sincere gratitude to the secretariat as a whole, and Sandra Falconer in particular, should be recorded. Their professionalism and support were outstanding, and Sandra was immensely helpful in putting together the final report.Professor Sheila A.M. McLean, LLB. MLitt, PhD, LLD, LLD, FRSE, FRCGP, F Med Sci, FSB, FRCP(Edin), FRSAInternational Bar Association Professor of Law and Ethics in MedicineChair 15 February 201167Content Page Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations5Chapter 19 Introduction and background Remit Approach Chapter 2 12 Evaluation of the current compensation system Evaluation of the system and proposals in England Evaluation of the proposals in Wales Evaluation of existing No Fault/No Blame systems in the UKChapter 3 25 Evaluation of existing No Fault systems in other jurisdictionsChapter 4 36 Analysis of principles No Fault liability and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) Chapter 5 42 Options consideredChapter 6 50 Additional considerationsChapter 7 55 Conclusions and recommendationsAppendices 59Appendix AReview Group membership Appendix BA Limited No Fault Scheme Appendix C List of evidence considered Appendix D DefinitionsResearch Reports published separately:Volume II - No Fault Compensation Schemes for Medical Injury: A ReviewVolume III - An empirical study of medical negligence claiming in ScotlandFor further information please contact:Sandra FalconerScottish Government Health DirectoratesPatient Support and Participation DivisionGround East RearSt Andrews HouseEdinburghEH1 3DGTel: 0131 244 2399E-Mail: sandra.falconerscotland.gsi.gov.uk Fax: 0131 244 2989AcknowledgementsWe are extremely grateful for the assistance provided during the course of our work by: Professor Jim Murdoch, Professor of Public Law, Glasgow University Staff at the British High Commission, New ZealandProfessor Ron Paterson, formerly Health and Disability Rights Commissioner, New ZealandAccident Compensation Corporation, New Zealand:Dr Jan WhiteACC Chief Executive,Dr Kevin Morris Director Clinical ServicesMike Playle Policy Manager, Strategic Policy & ResearchFiona Colman Senior Policy Analyst, Strategic Policy & Research Joy Baird Business Manager, Board & Corporate SupportProfessor Emeritus Henry Johansson, Medical Expert of the Patient Claims Panel Carl Espersson, Secretary of the Patient Claims Panel, SwedenKaj Essinger, Senior Advisor, Swedish Medical Injury Insurance Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations1. At the outset we sought to identify what we, as a group, considered a compensation system should seek to achieve. We a