Car-Insurance-UK-Supermarket.co.uk
compare online quotes the easy way
|
||||
|
||||
APIL: Jackson reforms could fall foul of Human Rights Act16 Feb 2011by Donald MacKenzie The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) and the Personal Injuries Bar Association (PIBA) sought the opinion of Nigel Pleming QC, a human rights and administrative/public law specialist, with regard to the Human Rights Act implications of the implementation of the proposed Jackson reforms, according to the Legal Futures site. Mr Pleming advised that there are “real prospects” of a challenge under the Human Rights Act because of the reforms’ impact on claimants with catastrophic injuries, in breach of articles 6 (access to justice) and 14 (fair treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The opinions of Mr Plemimg and barrister Colin Thomann were that “They seem to us to place claimants who have suffered the most complex personal injury at a particular disadvantage as regards their prospects of securing adequate legal representation, financial protection from adverse costs consequences and adequate compensation to permit a return to active daily life.” This would reduce the availability of access to justice, meaning “it seems to us there is a real prospect of a successful challenge under article 6”. The barristers also believed that victims of catastrophic and disabling injuries would likely be seen as a distinct 'class' for section 14 purposes, therefore the impact of the reforms on them would need 'substantial' justification. These concerns have been communicated to the Lord Chancellor, Ken Clarke, but the government would likely dispute their premise that the Jackson reforms reduce access to justice for severely injured claimants. We have spoken in favour of the Jackson Report recommendations and their likely positive impact on reducing the cost of car insurance in this country. |
||||
|
