I follow the noble Baroness, Lady Eaton, with temerity, as she has made a remarkable speech based on her personal knowledge. I thank her for what she has said.
I also speak with experience of clinical negligence cases. I practised as a solicitor for some 50 years and on many occasions during that time came across cases which involved clinical negligence. The Government appear to be suggesting that clinical negligence claims should proceed by way of joint expert reports. I think that that is pretty impractical. Medical and other experts often disagree, and to embark on a joint report is often totally impractical.
Legal aid should be available in all cases of clinical negligence where it appears to the Law Society, or whoever is arbitrating on the issue, to be practical and necessary. The ability to go to joint experts, where it is proved to be absolutely essential, should remain part of our legal process, and lawyers ought to be given the opportunity to do precisely that. It would save rather than expend more money if we were able to embark on such a policy, and that has been proved in practice time and time again. Why are we embarking now upon the totally impractical idea of a single expert?
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clinton-Davis
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
735 c1828 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:28:08 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_815642
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_815642
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_815642