Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 26 April 2018

26 Apr 2018 · S5 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

For an ordinary member of the public, understanding civil litigation can be a complex and confusing process. The Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Bill seeks to increase access to justice. By means of success fee agreements, it introduces provision whereby a lawyer who uses a damages-based agreement can take a share of their client’s injury compensation, which can include compensation for both past and future loss.

Amendment 34 seeks to ensure that the bill will protect the consumer by ensuring that the injured pursuer has the relevant information with which to make an informed choice about whether to accept the terms of the success fee agreement that is on offer where the damages are awarded not by a court but through a negotiated settlement. The amendment ensures that before the success fee is agreed—which can be by means of a damages-based agreement—the solicitor or provider has explained in writing to the client

“how the terms of the success fee agreement would determine the fee payable in respect of the different elements of damages that may be obtained”.

The onus is on the lawyer to state, in writing, that the amount that is being taken as part of the lawyer’s fee is fair and reasonable. Amendment 34 also ensures that the client has confirmed, in writing, that they have understood and agreed to the terms of the agreement. In addition, it ensures that, after an offer of damages is received, but before it is accepted, the recipient fully understands how much of the damages amount is being paid to their lawyer and, in particular, to what extent the part of the offer that relates to damages for future loss is being claimed as part of the lawyer’s fee.

It is important to recognise that compensation for future loss is awarded to an injured pursuer to cover their future care, which can include lost earnings while an injured person is off work and recovering, or travel expenses for expected future hospital appointments. In more serious personal injury cases, it could cover loss of all future earnings as well as the costs of future care and specialist equipment that may be needed. Therefore it is crucial that an injured pursuer fully understands how much of their future loss entitlement—which can vary, depending on very complex care needs—will instead go towards their solicitor’s fee if their case should be successful.

In addition, the amendment will ensure that the lawyer must provide

“a certificate that the fee payable is fair and reasonable in the circumstances of the case, and ... that no conflict of interest or undue influence has arisen”.

That will also provide protection for the lawyer.

In conclusion, in the minister’s remarks at stage 2, she indicated, in essence, that she thought that the Law Society of Scotland should be responsible for providing that client protection. However, as the Law Society lobbies in the best interests of its members, it is not best placed to set out what form that protection would take after the bill has been passed. By contrast, amendment 34 would set out provisions in the bill to ensure transparency and openness in a success fee agreement, and that an injured pursuer has the necessary information to enable them to make an informed choice as to whether to accept the agreement. As such, the amendment will provide checks and balances that will serve to protect solicitors and clients from any underlying potential conflict of interest.

I move amendment 34.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Christine Grahame) SNP
The next item of business is consideration of stage 3 amendments to the Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Bill. In dealing with am...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
I call group 1. Amendment 34, in the name of Margaret Mitchell, is the only amendment in the group.
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
For an ordinary member of the public, understanding civil litigation can be a complex and confusing process. The Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceed...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
I share many of Margaret Mitchell’s concerns, and it is important to note her comment on the proposals in the bill being about increasing access to justice. ...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD) LD
Like Daniel Johnson, I think that Margaret Mitchell very fairly identified an issue. Access to justice is predicated on there being a level of transparency a...
The Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
I refer members to my entry in the register of interests. Members will note that I am a member of the Law Society of Scotland and that I hold a current pract...
Margaret Mitchell Con
A number of points have been raised. Daniel Johnson said that the amendment might prohibit settlements at the court door, but there is nothing to prevent a p...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
The question is, that amendment 34 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
There will be a division. As this is the first division of the stage, the Parliament is suspended for five minutes. 14:44 Meeting suspended. 14:49 On resum...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
We will proceed with the division on amendment 34. For Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con) Ballantyne, Michelle (South Scotland) (Con) Bowman, Bill (North Ea...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
The result of the division is: For 29, Against 84, Abstentions 0. Amendment 34 disagreed to. Section 4—Power to cap success fees
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
We come to group 2. Amendment 5, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 6 to 8, 13 and 14.
Annabelle Ewing SNP
Amendments 5 to 8 are technical in nature. We have been working with Her Majesty’s Treasury on the United Kingdom Financial Guidance and Claims Bill, which w...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
We move to group 3. Amendment 1, in the name of Daniel Johnson, is grouped with amendments 2, 2A, 3 and 4.
Daniel Johnson Lab
I will speak to amendments 1 to 4 in my name and against Margaret Mitchell’s amendment 2A. I apologise in advance, Presiding Officer, as these are complex a...
Margaret Mitchell Con
Amendment 2A would amend amendment 2, in the name of Daniel Johnson, the effect of which would be to remove the ring fencing of future loss that was agreed t...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Does the member recognise that the awarding of additional fees, as she has set out and which she is setting a great deal of store by, is done in only 5 per c...
Margaret Mitchell Con
We are looking at legislation in which it is clearly set out that those cases are very complex, and the award amounts that we are talking about refer specifi...
Liam McArthur LD
It is difficult to admit that we got it wrong, but I think that that is exactly what all of us on the committee did at stage 2. There are mitigating circumst...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Green
I associate myself with the comments of my colleagues Daniel Johnson and Liam McArthur. I am prepared to say that it is important that we constantly reflect ...
Liam Kerr (North East Scotland) (Con) Con
I will speak against amendments 1 and 2. If amendment 2 is agreed to, we will support amendment 2A. I confirm that we will vote for amendments 3 and 4. At t...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Would Mr Kerr not recognise that the proportions that are charged under success fee agreements at the moment can be as high as 60 per cent, as Liam McArthur ...
Liam Kerr Con
I will come back to that point, but I want to deal with a point that Daniel Johnson made earlier. He criticised the insurance industry for allegedly wishing ...
Annabelle Ewing SNP
What evidence can the member cite to support that claim? He will be aware that it has been refuted by, for example, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers.
Liam Kerr Con
That is quite so but, in committee, we received a variety of evidence that suggested that there was a possibility of that happening and that it had happened ...
Annabelle Ewing SNP
I rise to support Daniel Johnson’s amendments 1 to 4. The bill as introduced followed Sheriff Principal Taylor’s recommendation that an award for future loss...
Liam Kerr Con
In those conversations with solicitors firms, did many of them report back that, if the future loss was ring fenced, they would cease to act in personal inju...
Annabelle Ewing SNP
We have to look at the facts that are before us and listen to the evidence that has been submitted to me as the minister and to the committee. People are tel...
Margaret Mitchell Con
Does the minister acknowledge that the situation in England and Wales is not analogous with the situation in Scotland, and that we are not comparing apples w...
Annabelle Ewing SNP
I have already dealt with that point. Notwithstanding the issue about judicial expenses, the architect of the policy south of the border has effectively reca...