I am anxious to follow the hon. Gentleman’s point because he speaks as though public input into the costs and the problem of firms bearing the cost of vexatious litigants with nuisance applications are almost the same thing. As configured before the Lords amendment, the LSB will have discretion—it will no doubt exercise it properly, subject to judicial review—over whether it awards costs against the firm. That point was satisfactory before the amendment. The hon. Gentleman raises a different issue about whether the public should pay for the ongoing running costs, and it is intended that such costs should be met from a levy and from costs per case from the firm.
Legal Services Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Vera Baird
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 4 June 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
461 c58 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:24:03 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400190
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400190
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400190