Clause 1

Part of Legal Services Bill [Lords] – in a Public Bill Committee at 11:30 am on 12 June 2007.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of John Mann John Mann PPS (Rt Hon Richard Caborn, Minister of State), Department for Culture, Media & Sport 11:30, 12 June 2007

In terms of unforeseen consequences, has the Minister considered that, if the amendment were part of statute, it would provide a defence for any solicitor who had identified two clients to the individual consumer by definition, because it is in statute? In other words, they would say that, because it is in statute, they are either breaking the law, which would require a legal remedy, or that they are not, otherwise someone would have taken legal action against them. Therefore, the consumer arguing on the best-interest principle, as in the case of Watson Burton and P and R Associates, would be tied down in a legal defence and a circle that they could get out of, purely because it existed in statute, which in itself would be the defence of the solicitor who might not have acted in the best interests of the individual consumer.