Proceeding contribution from Viscount Hailsham (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 17 October 2007. It occurred during Opposition day on Foot and Mouth/Bluetongue.
Foot and Mouth/Bluetongue
The Secretary of State has been extremely generous in giving way. One matter is troubling me. He says that the institute is not liable for the costs of the damage because nobody was negligent. However, as I understand it, the general proposition is that if a landowner has potentially dangerous material on site and it escapes, the landowner is responsible for the consequences. One obvious example of that is in respect of domestic animals. The Secretary of State knows well that if a horse escapes from a site, the relevant landowner will be responsible even in the absence of negligence. Indeed, the Secretary of State's own Department is considering changing the law to address that point. I do not understand how liability can be avoided, given that the virus escaped from a Government institution.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 464 c859
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Inspections Diseases Disease control Foot and mouth disease Livestock Standards Laboratories Bluetongue disease
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:51:55 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417669
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417669
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417669