Compensation Bill [HL]

I think I can be brief. As I made clear on the first day of the Grand Committee, my view is that since the decision of your Lordships’ House in Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council the substantive law is about right. I was therefore distinctly dubious about the value of Clause 1, as it seemed to me that it led to two risks. First, there was the risk that the courts would disregard the statement in the Explanatory Notes that this was intended merely as a statement of the current law and would take the view that it must have some intention to change the law. Secondly, it would considerably increase the risk of satellite litigation by people trying to say that it does change the law. Amendments Nos. 15 to 25 inclusive would increase both those risks. I am rising at this stage, at the beginning of a new day in Grand Committee, to say that I am unable to support any of Amendments Nos. 15 to 25, but I will not rise again to say so in those debates.