§ 3.17 p.m.
§ Lord Hunt of Wirralasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are satisfied with the progress made since the introduction of the Woolf reforms to civil justice procedure six months ago.
§ The Lord Chancellor (Lord Irvine of Lairg)My Lords, I am heartened by the reports of good progress from right across the system since the new regime was instituted on 26th April. The object is to drive down cost and delay in court proceedings through firm judicial case management and to promote more settlements.
New time limits are being complied with under pre-action protocols. There is a greater exchange of information and documents earlier on. There has been a 35 per cent drop in new cases since 26th April. It is much too early to draw firm conclusions, but many more cases may be settling pre-court to avoid the disciplines of the new system. Litigation may be becoming the last, not the first, resort.
Fears that reforms would result in a deluge of appeals have been misplaced. There have been very few. These are early days, but it is looking good.
§ Lord Hunt of WirralMy Lords, I welcome the words of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor and I welcome too the positive way in which the Woolf reforms have been received right across the field of litigation, making it once again the last resort. Will the noble and learned Lord take this opportunity to welcome the code of best practice on rehabilitation endorsed by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and also the Forum of Insurance Lawyers as being a model which will at last make the courts able to accept that the primary objective for the victim is rehabilitation? In that context, will he also give the courts power to order income settlements so that we can move away from out of date, often inappropriate lump-sum settlements towards greater security in the future for the victim?
§ The Lord ChancellorMy Lords, the noble Lord asked two supplementary questions. First, perhaps I may take this opportunity to welcome as a first-class initiative the new code on rehabilitation, to which the 168 noble Lord drew attention. It is highly progressive to put a duty on both solicitors—the solicitor for the claimant and the insurer's solicitor—to make an early assessment of how the quality of the victim's life can be improved by early intervention, medical treatment or rehabilitation. Appropriate medical treatment as early as possible as well as non-medical treatment--for example, psychotherapy, occupational therapy and counselling—can be critical to rehabilitation.
Secondly, the noble Lord asked about having income settlements in place of lump sum settlements. It is possible, in the context of structured settlements, for the court to make such orders today but subject to a limitation—only if the parties agree. In fact, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, has called for the courts to have powers of their own motion to make awards of periodic payments in place of lump sum awards. Speaking for myself, I think that there is a very great deal to be said in favour of that. I shall be issuing a consultation paper shortly on settling the appropriate discount rate to be applied to lump sum payments and at the same time I shall be seeking views on whether the courts should be given powers of their own motion to order income settlements.
§ Lord BorrieMy Lords, does my noble and learned friend share the concerns reportedly expressed by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, and by Sir Richard Scott that the court fees are so high with regard to small claims made by claimants that they may be deterred from using the scheme which my noble and learned friend himself has increased in importance by raising the limit to £5,000?
§ The Lord ChancellorMy Lords, I am fully familiar with and sympathise with the concerns that have been raised about the amount of the allocation fees in very small claims. I am actively considering this very issue on an urgent basis. I have to say, however, that it is in the context of a system which requires overall full cost recovery. The costs of the civil courts should be met by the parties who use them rather than fall on the taxpayer. Thus any reduction in allocation fees, for which I can particularly see strong justification in the case of small claims, will have to be dealt with through other fees. But, that said, I am looking sympathetically at the particular problem to which the noble Lord has called attention.
§ Lord Phillips of SudburyMy Lords, I declare an interest as a solicitor with three offices, all of which do legal aid and two of which are high street practices, and commend what the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor said about the Woolf reforms and progress so far. Will the Government have particular regard to the difficulties faced by many small high street firms in trying to match the higher demands of the Woolf proposals against extremely high caseloads, bearing in mind that they are the only resort for most citizens, and the extremely modest levels of remuneration with which most of those firms have to contend?
§ The Lord ChancellorMy Lords, we had all this out many times during the debates on the Access to Justice 169 Bill. However, I have to say that a principal benefit of the new reforms is that the state will support only lawyers who are quality assured and lawyers who have sufficient qualifications and expertise to undertake cases calling for these qualities.