Mr. Raymond O'Rourke:

The preamble mentions two weeks. I know that the preambles do not have to be transposed but I transposed lots of legislation in the Balkans and that is the thought process of the Commission. If it puts two weeks, Ireland might say three or four weeks but it is within that. What is in the Bill is very breezy and easy. It is really up to yourselves. You know that if you are in these situations, the other side might start doing a bit of a Trump, appealing, going back and forth and just using up the time and then the injunctive relief is of little use.

In Persona Digital Telephony Limited v.the Minister for Public Enterprise, the Supreme Court ruled that third-party funding to support a plaintiff's legal costs and disbursements, that is, payments by a solicitor to a third party and claim back from a client, is unlawful. This judgement causes a bit of friction, which is why things are not very clear here.

I hear the Law Society talking again about the multiparty Bill and how we can do things with the High Court judge. What can I say? The committee knows I am a very strong European. Why have a directive if you are going to have your own legal system decide how you do things? This directive has come from Europe and we are part of the EU and must implement it in some ways. Dare I say it, it is a bit like a spurious Brexit way of doing it - a case of we have a different legal system and we will just do it our own way and give consumers their rights in that way. The consumers' rights are highlighted in this. I know, as does the Deputy having been a Minister in this area, that it is minimum harmonisation. It is full harmonisation in the food area. Minimum harmonisation has always been in the area of consumers because the Swedes do things and the UK used to do things much more strongly than other countries and, therefore, there had to be this balance. Regarding getting a balance, it is a bit of a cop-out to say our legal system is different from that of everybody else. It is common law, we have these High Court rules and we are looking after the consumer. I find this to be an incorrect way of transposing the directive.