Compensation Bill [HL]

I did not think that I would find a pattern—but, unfortunately, I was not given the briefing that the noble Lord has. I would be very happy to look at it; indeed, I have arranged to meet the organisation involved in the near future to discuss these issues, because I know that they are of concern to this particular part of the industry—if that is an appropriate term to use. I have found that clearly the courts, in looking at the circumstances, were mindful of the way in which the individual had behaved and made the decision to determine the percentage of contributory negligence appropriately. Of course, one could argue that that could be challenged, but I find a whole range of different cases at different levels. I was not looking for a pattern or to see whether one had a particular set of cases in a particular set of circumstances. I should be very happy to do that, and to look at evidence that suggested that. But the law is very clear that the 1945 Act allows the courts to consider contributory negligence and the courts seem to take that into account in an appropriate and proper manner. There is enough evidence to satisfy me that we need to leave the law as it stands and enable the courts to continue in that vein.