Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 17 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.


Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give me a chance to put forward our opposition to the amendments. First, the amendments are unnecessary. The legal climate in which mesothelioma cases can be brought has wholly changed in recent years, and nothing in our proposals should prevent cases from being taken or those affected from receiving appropriate damages. Secondly, in making an exception to our change to the no win, no fee conditional fee arrangements regime, the amendments would create inconsistency and damage the wider goal of our reforms—to restore sense to the costs of litigation, which have been substantially increased by the way in which no win, no fee cases operate, largely to the detriment of defendants.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c264-5 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disability Children Compensation Children in care Asylum Damages Costs Asbestosis Asbestos Legal profession Health services Evidence Legal aid scheme Immigration Liability Domestic abuse Insurance Languages Legal Services Commission Legal costs Industrial diseases Negligence Mesothelioma Social services Social security benefits Training Telephone services Law centres Lord Chancellor Citizens' advice bureaux Care leavers
Legislation
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk