Proceeding contribution from Lord Wallace of Tankerness (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 March 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
My Lords, this may not be quite what the noble Lord was thinking about, but in some cases, as my noble friend Lord Faulks indicated, if there is a question of a claim following a bereavement, we have indicated that we intend that there should be an uplift in these cases. On the question of why we are not introducing QOCS for judicial review claims—this may be the circumstance to which the noble Lord was referring—the responses to the consultation indicated that conditional fee agreements were less commonly used outside the area of personal injury and were not frequently used in judicial review proceedings.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 736 c305
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Disadvantaged Damages Advisory services Asbestosis Asbestos Legal profession Health services Fees and charges Human rights Legal aid scheme Liability Environment Exemptions Injuries Insolvency Insurance Legal Services Commission Legal costs Industrial diseases Property transfer Negligence Mesothelioma Pneumoconiosis Trade unions Telephone services Conditional fee agreements
- Legislation
- Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:11:02 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817661
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817661
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817661