§ 36. Mr. Doughtyasked the Minister without Portfolio whether he will take steps to extend legal aid to persons who are obliged by circumstances beyond their control to proceed by way of arbitration in respect of the costs of so proceeding.
§ Mr. DoughtyIs the Minister without Portfolio aware that this procedure is 2096 causing great hardship to people who may have a judgment on third-party rights against insurance companies but are prevented from recovering that judgment because they cannot proceed by way of arbitration?
§ Sir Eric FletcherThere may be isolated cases of hardship, but the hon. and learned Member will be aware that in 1957 the British Insurance Association and Lloyd's both gave an undertaking to the Lord Chancellor that their members would not in future insist on an arbitration clause if the insured preferred to bring proceedings in court. Therefore, I cannot think that the extension of legal aid to arbitration has a very high degree of priority. If and when legal aid can be extended, there are other courts and tribunals, such as the Land Tribunal, and the various kinds of maintenance cases in the magistrates' courts, which would, I think, have a higher priority.
§ Mr. HoggBut would not the hon. Gentleman look at this matter again? The need for legal aid is extremely flexible and one cannot relate it to the particular court in which the proceedings are brought. Is it not the fact that the real need for legal aid is the need to establish a right of any kind? Will not the hon. Gentleman consider whether he can make his rules more flexible?
§ Sir Eric FletcherI will certainly consider the matter with my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman will appreciate that arbitration cases, pure and simple—particularly commercial arbitrations—tend in the ordinary way to be expensive, and there might be difficulties about extending legal aid to arbitrations in general.