division_name: Civil Liability Bill [Lords] &#8212; Restriction on increase in small claims limit for relevant personal injuries
motion: <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;a claim for &#163;4,000 for loss of earnings and other losses, plus a claim for &#163;800 for damages for pain and suffering, is a claim which would be allocated to the small claims track&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/10" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Personal injuries litigation is the paradigm instance of litigation in which the parties are in an asymmetric relationship.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/12" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;the only reason to increase the Personal Injury small claims limit would be to reflect inflation since 1999&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/14" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;I propose that the present limit stays at &#163;1,000 until inflation warrants an increase to &#163;1,500&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/17" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;CPI is a much better measure of inflation&#8230;we are seeking to move away from RPI&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c151.0/19" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;We have RPI, which most would acknowledge has known errors. We have CPI, which is what virtually everyone recognises and is in our remit.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c164.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;rupture of a&#8230;tendon or ligament in the neck, back or shoulder&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c164.3/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;if they want that &#163;2,000, they&#8217;ll lie.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c164.3/5" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;When it comes down to a woman who&#8217;s had an accident&#8230;I&#8217;ll make her cry&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c170.0/6" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Claims under &#163;5,000 are not minor, and an increase in the small claims limit will cover far more than soft tissue injuries. These claims could include a brain or head injury, injuries to the eyes, a collapsed lung, or fractured cheekbones. This is a disproportionate response to the stated aim of dealing with whiplash claims.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c173.1/5" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;no interest adverse to that of the child or protected party&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="c178.1/8" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;I can see no reason in principle why a small damages claim made by an infant should be taken out of the small claims track merely because of the age of the claimant. It is also clear that the premise on which CPR 45.7 operates is that the normal track for damages by infants will be the small claims track.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="italic" pid="c178.1/12" pwmotiontext="yes">The House divided:</p>
  
  <p pid="c178.1/13" pwmotiontext="yes">Ayes 240, Noes 287.</p>