Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Jones (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 30 March 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Small Claims (Courts).


Small Claims (Courts)

: I am sure that that is correct. Again, as the hon. Member for Hendon stated, damages for personal injuries have not increased significantly over the years, so in many respects the question of inflation is not relevant. The position would be exacerbated substantially if the small claims limit were significantly increased, because most injury cases arise from motor accidents. The motor insurance industry has effective, and frequently very aggressive, in-house negotiators operating on its behalf. Such people know exactly what their job is, and frequently it is to intimidate the claimant into not pursuing his claim. It is very difficult for a claimant facing such an aggressive negotiator to take his courage in both hands, go before the court and argue his case himself. The report refers to evidence from District Judge Walker on the level of damages that are awarded in straightforward injury cases. He talks about damages in the region of £1,000 to £2,500. However, cases are not always so straightforward, and some much more complex injuries result in relatively small damages. The Law Society has pointed out that a whiplash injury giving rise to pain for many years can result in an award of only £2,000 or £3,000. Anyone who has been involved in personal injury cases knows that whiplash injuries are frequently extremely difficult to prove, but can be very painful for the unfortunate claimant. Another matter was touched on by the hon. Member for Hendon. Although the claims in many of the cases that we are considering are small in absolute terms, they can be a significant matter for the claimant. The Law Society has pointed out that a personal injury claim for £2,500 represents 10 weeks' earnings for someone on the minimum wage. Although in absolute terms that is not a large sum of money, for the individual claimant, it is a matter of great importance. The system of tracking is designed to ensure that litigants have their cases disposed of as efficiently, speedily and inexpensively as possible. There is no evidence that handling personal injury claims on the fast track does not work. Indeed, the fact that costs will potentially be awarded at the end of the day makes it, in my experience, all the more likely that the litigators on both sides will want to conclude the litigation as quickly as possible. The vast majority of cases under £5,000 are road traffic cases and they are usually settled without going to court at all. What is required is to continue to encourage the efficient handling of small claims, which is not necessarily the same as saying that more cases should be allocated to the small claims track. What should be encouraged is the early settlement of disputes. For that purpose, in cases of personal injury, the intervention of lawyers at an early stage is important. If the limit is raised significantly, that will be a positive disincentive to claimants to take their cases to court, and justice will not be served. If that happens, it will reflect no credit on this House or on anyone else involved in the process.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c340-1WH 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Courts Administration of justice Software Fees and charges ICT Enforcement Small claims
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk