header-logo header-logo

21 April 2017
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Prisons and Courts Bill dropped

The government has dropped the Prisons and Courts Bill, owing to lack of time in the run-up to the General Election on 8 June.

MPs on the Bill Committee this week voted to abandon the controversial Bill, which would have paved the way for online courts, introduced tariffs for whiplash claims, banned settlement of soft tissue injury claims without a doctor’s opinion, reformed prisons and introduced safeguards to protect domestic violence victims being cross-examined by abusive partners in the family courts.

Qamar Anwar, managing director of First4Lawyers, says: 'The news that the Prisons & Courts Bill has been dropped ahead of the election gives the personal injury industry breathing space but nobody should be celebrating.

'There is every chance that a victorious Conservative government would seek to resurrect the reforms in Pt 5 of the Bill. So now it not the time to sit back and relax—the claimant sector needs to work together and keep fighting the myths peddled by the insurers about fraud and the so-called compensation culture.'

However, Huw Evans, director general of the Association of British insurers (ABI), said: 'We did not expect the Bill to be pushed through before the election and are pleased it hasn’t as this would have removed the main opportunity to get a fair reform of the discount rate.

'Aspects of the whiplash provisions were also unsatisfactory, so it is better these didn’t make it onto the statute book unresolved. The task now is to win the argument for both issues to be dealt with as a priority in the new Parliament so there are no major delays to much needed reform.

'Issues like the increased cost of insurance for motorists and businesses and the £6bn bill for the NHS are not going to go away, so the incentives for a new government to act promptly are there.'

Law Society president Robert Bourns said urged the new government elected in June to 'make an absolute priority in re-introducing the proposals providing protection for victims of domestic violence from being cross-examined by their abusers in the family court'.

Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll