UK Parliament / Open data

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].

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.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

791 c1602 

Session

2017-19

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top