Meeting of the Parliament 27 June 2018
I must press on.
I turn to an issue that Daniel Johnson and Tom Arthur mentioned, and of which Alison Harris gave a helpful explanation—discoverability and joint and several liability. The Scottish Government consulted the SLC on joint and several liability, the law on which the bill will not change.
I am heartened to hear universal approval of the clarity that the proposed new discoverability test will bring. The test will improve the position of creditors generally in relation to latent damages. It is significant that Brodies LLP, in its submission to the committee, was clear in its view that
“the reform of s11(3)”—
of the 1973 act—
“will be welcomed since it clarifies the essential facts which a party must be aware of before a 5 year prescriptive period starts to run in respect of an obligation to pay damages.”
The bill remedies a defect that Morrison v ICL Plastics brought about, and I am heartened by the consensus across the chamber that that is to be welcomed.
There are many more issues in this technical but fascinating bill. I simply thank members again for their speeches in the debate. It is clear that many if not all members support the general principles of this important bill: to provide fairness, clarity and certainty to those areas of the law of negative prescription that have caused practical difficulties in its operation.
The bill is an opportunity for this Parliament to protect those who have a claim from running out of time in which to proceed with it, to change the current situation of possible perpetual liability to claims, including for those who have historical council tax debt, and to make clearer which obligations prescribe after five years.