My noble friend Lord Kinnoull referred to “jurisprudential purity”. I would prefer to describe it as the essential role of the judiciary in deciding what compensation is appropriate. I would be very grateful if the Minister would tell the House whether there is any precedent for a Minister, rather than judges, deciding on the appropriate level of compensation for a civil claimant when that compensation is being paid not by the state—I recognise that that may be a different matter—but by a private wrongdoer or, more accurately, their insurance company. I suggest that either there is no precedent or this is rare, for a very good reason: put simply, judges, not Ministers—or their civil servants, more accurately—have expertise and independence in this area. For those reasons, I strongly support the speech made by my noble and learned friend Lord Woolf.
Civil Liability Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Pannick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 12 June 2018.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Civil Liability Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
791 c1602 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-10-17 12:16:59 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-06-12/18061256000143
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-06-12/18061256000143
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-06-12/18061256000143