Overview

This bill amends the Compensation Act 2006. It introduces a presumption that defendants undertaking "desirable activities" have met the required standard of care in negligence or breach of statutory duty cases. This means the claimant would need to provide stronger evidence to prove negligence.

Description

The bill replaces Section 1 of the Compensation Act 2006. The new Section 1 mandates that courts, when assessing negligence or statutory duty breach claims, presume defendants engaging in "desirable activities" met the necessary standard of care. This presumption shifts the burden of proof, requiring claimants to demonstrate that the defendant did not meet the standard of care, rather than the defendant proving they did. The definition of "desirable activity" is not explicitly defined within the bill itself, leaving interpretation to the courts.

Government Spending

The bill's direct impact on government spending is unclear. The potential reduction in successful negligence claims *could* lead to lower payouts from public funds in some cases, but the magnitude is unpredictable and depends on judicial interpretation of "desirable activity". No specific figures are provided in the bill.

Groups Affected

• Claimants in negligence cases: This bill could make it significantly harder for them to win compensation, as they will need to provide stronger evidence to overcome the presumption of due care.
• Defendants in negligence cases: This bill offers them greater protection, reducing the likelihood of successful claims against them, particularly if involved in activities deemed “desirable”.
• Insurers: Potentially lower payouts for liability claims, though the degree is uncertain.
• Courts: Increased workload interpreting the term "desirable activity" and evaluating the evidence in cases where the presumption applies.

Powered by nyModel