Commons Sense

House of Commons · General Debate

Damages

15 June 2020 · 4 other contributors

Opened by Chris Philp Con Croydon South

Justice & Courts

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Chris Philp raised concerns about damages in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.

Key points

  • The draft order aims to allow cohabiting partners who have lived together for at least two years to receive bereavement damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.
  • The Lord Chancellor sets the level of bereavement damages at 15,120, recently increased to match inflation.
  • The minister welcomed support from the Labour Front Bench and highlighted the order's consistency with existing section 1.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Chris Philp Con Croydon South

The draft order seeks to rectify an incompatibility with the European convention on human rights identified by the Court of Appeal, allowing cohabiting partners who have lived together for at least two years to receive bereavement damages under section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. The level of bereavement damages is set by the Lord Chancellor and currently stands at £15,120, having been recently increased in line with inflation. This order corrects a deficiency and rights a wrong.

Other contributors (4)
  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Asked the Minister to confirm that the remedial Act and SI will protect cohabiting families who are life partners but have not taken legal steps to marry, ensuring they receive recognition in bereavement damages.

  • Chris Philp Con Croydon South

    Confirmed the draft order allows people cohabiting for at least two years to enjoy the same eligibility for bereavement damages as those who are in civil partnerships or married. It avoids intrusive inquiries about the nature of the relationship and simply divides any damages equally if a partner also has a spouse elsewhere.

  • Peter Kyle Lab Hove and Portslade

    Supported the remedial order, highlighting the injustice faced by cohabiting partners not recognised by law. Emphasised that Parliament owes gratitude to Jakki Smith for her perseverance in bringing this issue forward.

  • Eleanor Laing

    I could suspend the House, but I really do not think it is necessary if Members promise me that they will swiftly exit without stopping near any other Members. Let us proceed.

Government Response

Chris Philp

Welcomed the support from the Labour Front Bench, thanked Jakki Smith for her bravery and tenacity, and addressed points raised about language descriptions, stating consistency with section 1 was maintained. Emphasised that remedial orders are strictly designed to remedy deficiencies.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy