Compensation Bill [HL]

I am sorry I did not address that part effectively. On children, for instance, a child is necessarily involved in the activity and risks are involved. The child has undertaken to do that activity and in my view the notice should not be sufficient in all cases. In some cases, it might be, just as a verbal warning to say, ““Don’t run down that pathway because it’s dangerous””, might be sufficient, but it might not be in the particular circumstances. That was my difficulty with that element. I am not sure that I could have read out to the noble Lord, ““It does it for me and never mind the noble Lord””, so perhaps I may come back to him in writing on the point. He explained it in his earlier remarks and subsequently and I need to look at it again. However, my main thrust is to be clear that for people engaged in such activities, yes, there is risk but would we, by including this provision, be saying that there were mitigating factors, meaning that the courts could not look across the whole range of circumstances? We need to look at that issue.