Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl of Erroll (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Compensation Bill [HL].


Compensation Bill [HL]

The amendment does not say that an admission of guilt after saying sorry will be ignored. The example of running into the back of someone’s car is a bad one, because one may well then blurt on that one was listening to the Test match, or something idiotic like that. That is an admission of guilt. I am thinking more about someone, let us say, twisting his ankle on a step in a park somewhere and the owner of the park says, ““Oh, gosh, I am sorry””. This step is there, and there will be a huge issue about whether the owner of the park is liable for the step or for a pothole which has grown over a while. There are lots of instances where a little word of sorry may well sort out the matter where there is not really a huge liability issue. There is a huge difference between the two things.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c283GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Complaints Compensation Abuse Courts Damages Advertising Evidence Drugs Drunkenness NHS Personal injury Local government finance Public bodies Marketing Negligence Schools Regulation Voluntary work Risk assessment Claims management services
Legislation
Compensation Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk