We have discussed the issue in detail with not only stakeholder organisations representing the interests of animals, but lawyers who have represented victims. The hon. Gentleman is shaking his head, but this is true. We have discussed the matter in detail with lawyers representing the insurance industry. They have a given a written explanation—I will happily send it to him—of the way in which the 2003 Mirvahedy judgment has ““muddied the waters”” and led to greater confusion and uncertainty over claims in the area.
Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Stephen Crabb
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 14 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
473 c518 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:50:19 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455305
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455305
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455305