Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

I do not know if the Minister realises, but he has undershot the entire premise and logic put forward for this Part. If I am right, he dismissed the costs that might be incurred but he said there might be an impact on the time. I would argue that the time saved would be minuscule. The Minister seems to accept that we are now in a situation following the Higgins case where there is a parameter and that is being adhered to by the courts and by juries. We had a very high-profile case involving the former president of my party and awards were given precisely in line with the standards that have now been set.

The Minister has not addressed something that arose in conversations, private and otherwise, with legal professionals, including judges. Has he considered that what will happen as a result of this move is an increase in the length of time and the costs because the likelihood of appeals will be substantially higher? The reason for that is because people are less likely to appeal a jury verdict because they know that higher courts are very reticent to overturn a jury decision. Very particular points of law must be made in that respect. They are not as reticent about overturning a decision of one of their colleagues in the Judiciary. That is a matter of fact.

My estimation is that, far from the stated rationale he presents, this Part will do the exact opposite because we will see increased pressure on the overall court system.

See this speech in context