Justice: Personal Injury Cases Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Wales Office

Justice: Personal Injury Cases

Lord Hoyle Excerpts
Tuesday 20th December 2011

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked By
Lord Hoyle Portrait Lord Hoyle
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they are proposing that personal injury claimants pay part of their legal costs.

Lord Wallace of Tankerness Portrait The Advocate-General for Scotland (Lord Wallace of Tankerness)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Government are reforming no-win no-fee conditional fee arrangements to return them to the basis on which they were first introduced in the 1990s. CFAs worked well then, and personal injury claimants were liable to contribute to their lawyer’s success fee if the lawyer charged one. However, CFA claimants no longer have an interest in the costs run up on their behalf. Our reforms will bring proportion to civil litigation costs while preserving access to justice.

Lord Hoyle Portrait Lord Hoyle
- Hansard - -

Does the Minister not understand that many people who have suffered serious and maybe life-threatening injuries will be deterred from seeking compensation? Far from saving £50 million, as has been suggested, recent Parliamentary Answers have shown that this measure will cost the Government over £100 million, which comprises legal fees, additional compensation and loss of income from recovered treatment fees from insurers? This is a folly. It will deter ordinary people from going forward to seek the compensation that is due to them.

Lord Wallace of Tankerness Portrait Lord Wallace of Tankerness
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Government do not accept that the measure will deter people from coming forward. As I indicated, the reforms brought in by my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay of Clashfern in the 1990s, which introduced the no-win no-fee conditional fee agreements, allowed people suffering from personal injuries to come forward and pursue their claims. We are not satisfied that at present there is a proper proportion with regard to the amount of fees charged, particularly where the claimant has no interest in ensuring that they are kept within modest means. The system has got out of proportion; our reforms seek to bring it back into proportion.