Mr. Mark Harty:

Senator Ward spoke about damages and juries. That has undoubtedly been a difficulty and a problem but I would say it has been resolved because now a jury can be given clear direction as to what damages they may award. Unfortunately in the past, where that direction has been given, people have given figures at absolute opposite ends of the scale. The defendant will suggest tiny damages and the plaintiff will, unfortunately, nominate excessive damages. That is no longer possible in the scheme. But there are also other ways to deal with it. For example, it could be possible to create a statutory scheme whereby the judge could be the person who makes the final award of damages, so the jury's award could be advisory of damage but not necessarily the final orders. Such verdicts do exist in other jurisdictions, in the US in particular where they contain what is called a special verdict which is an advisory verdict as to damages. It is a way for the jury to indicate how serious it believes the issue to have been yet at the same time to keep the verdict in line with accepted jurisprudence. There are a variety of ways that could be done.