§ Mr. Bercow
To ask the Solicitor-General how many cases have been brought against her Department under the Human Rights Act 1998; and what has been the cost in(a) legal fees to defend cases and (b) compensation payments. 
§ The Solicitor-General
[holding answer 25 March 2002]: In relation to my own Department, the Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers, no cases have been brought against the Department under the Human Rights Act 1998.
In the Departments for which the Attorney-General is responsible, details are as follows:
Crown Prosecution Service
The Crown Prosecution Service does not monitor centrally those cases that include a claim under the Human Rights Act, or collect information centrally in relation to the cost of these cases in terms of legal fees to defend the cases or compensation payments.
In general, claimants bring actions against the Crown Prosecution Service in two ways: by claiming malicious prosecution and/or negligence.
Some of these claims refer to the Human Rights Act 1998.
No records of cases against the Crown Prosecution Service are kept and the Department does not collect separate information centrally about the cost of legal fees and compensation payments in these cases.857W
Treasury Solicitor's Department
The Treasury Solicitor's Department conducts litigation on behalf of many Government Departments but does not hold central records identifying all cases in which the Human Rights Act is relied upon. In relation to those cases where the Treasury Solicitor's Department is a party to litigation, the position is the same. Human rights are now integrated into the general law and are rarely the sole basis for a legal challenge. In relation to those cases brought against the Department, two have been identified which included human rights points.
The Treasury Solicitor's Department does not collect separate information centrally about the cost of legal fees or compensation payments in cases which include human rights issues. In most cases it will be difficult to single out associated costs relating to the human rights element of a case.
Serious Fraud Office
The Serious Fraud Office knows of no cases where the actions of its members or the use of its statutory powers have been challenged under the Human Rights Act. However, the Act permits Convention points to be raised, either by themselves or together with domestic law, in support of legal argument in criminal proceedings, or in judicial review applications. Obviously, since the implementation of the Act, Convention points have been raised frequently in litigation in SFO cases, principally in support of complaints of unreasonable delay. It is impossible to separate the cost of defending Human Rights Act arguments from prosecution costs generally but neither do we consider that there would be any justifiable case for doing so.