I support my noble friend Lord Kingsland in raising an amendment that explores an important point. This is really a question of whether you get the full supervision—and, if necessary, correction—of the High Court or the valuable but incomplete supervision that comes from judicial review. The noble Lord, Lord Whitty, need not worry that everything will get pushed off to the High Court. The number of cases that would be appealed by a lawyer found liable by the ombudsman, be he barrister or solicitor, would be few and far between.
As tribunals can go seriously wrong there is a possibility that, as my noble friend said, they can sweep over from the individual complaint—on, let us say, competence, which may have caused some financial loss—to a disciplinary matter. Consequently, it can affect somebody’s very livelihood and their right to practice. There is a strong case for saying that we ought to consider carefully whether there should be no right of appeal, and in that spirit I support my noble friend’s amendment.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lyell of Markyate
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 February 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c1135 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:09:20 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378929
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378929
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378929