Oral question asked in the House of Lords, by Lord Henley (Conservative). It was answered on Tuesday, 1 December 2009.
Libel
- Question
- My Lords, does the Minister accept—I think that he partially did in his first Answer—that the real problem is the costs in libel cases, particularly the very high costs in London, rather than necessarily any problems within libel law itself?
- Answer
-
Being a Whip, I have had to learn all about this in the past two days. I do not accept that any one of these issues is quite as heavy as the noble Lord suggests. There would be no magnet to London if our balance were the same as that in the US. These libels will be prosecuted at the appropriate place. There is no question, though, but that cost is a serious issue. The costs are accentuated by the conditional fee agreement with the 100 per cent uplift and the after-the-event insurance, which could be 65 per cent of the cost, meaning that the defendant can end up with 165 per cent more costs than were actually incurred. It is undoubtedly true that the costs are a substantial part of the chilling effect.
Secondary information
- Type
- Oral question
- Reference
- 715 c674
- Session
- 2009-10
- Oral question type
- Supplementary
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Defamation Jurisdiction Prosecutions
- Link
- View this Oral question on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-01 15:22:41 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1469890/-question
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1469890/-question
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1469890/-question