 The recent personal injury awards, was the first of its kind, awarding those who have excelled in their particular field. One thing was clear from the awards, the world of injury lawyers is divided between defendant lawyers (those acting alongside insurance companies) and claimant lawyers (those defending accident victims). The reason for the divided could simply put down to lawyers defending claimants are fighting the good fight against the ‘evil’ insurance companies, and the lawyers working for the insurance companies are nothing better than corporate sell-outs.
A valid reason this may be, but the host for the evening legal editor Joshua Rozenburg mentioned in his reflective article on the evening’s events that when he pointed out that everyone has the right to legal justice even Insurance companies. He was met with a barrage of boos from a section of the audience and although some defended is point many had said that he had upset claimant lawyers by speaking up for a defendant lawyer. One lawyer said that the situation between the two fractions where almost ‘tribal’, but the big question is why are fractions of injury lawyers arguing when essentially they are all singing from the same song book.
The lawyer in question that led to Rozenburg being booed was David Pugh a lawyer who had successfully defended a case which led to a ruling by law lords which said that pleural plaques, scars on the lining of the lungs caused by exposure to asbestos, did not constitute an injury for which compensation could be awarded. Obviously this angered many victims of asbestos, which led them to protest outside the awards, putting a slight dampener on the night’s proceedings. Obviously the victims have the right to be angry about the ruling, but is it fair to blame a man who was simply doing his job?
Let’s talk hypothetically, this is not strictly to do with personal injury but what this does show is that there are people who will do anything to take advantage of the legal system, and they would get away with it if they could. A couple on a documentary about the current lending crisis had managed to worm there way out of £100,000 pounds of debt, which they did legitimately owe. Using legal lo polls they managed to get lenders to write off the debt. They got so carried away they tried to take it to a court to set a legal president. The judge threw the case out saying that the couple where just opportunists trying to worm there way out of debt.
The point of that little story was to show that there are always people out there who will try to take advantage of the legal system, and there will always be lawyers who will be happy to represent them. If there weren’t good defendant lawyers working for the big company’s then people will be able to abuse the legal system.
The asbestos case may be an ethical mind field, but what the two different fractions of lawyers need to realise is that the legal system works because there are the highest quality lawyers working for both sides, and anyone looking to take advantage of the legal system are quickly weeded out. So whatever that pleural plaques, scars on the lining of the lungs caused by exposure to asbestos, did not constitute an injury for which compensation could be awarded.
You might think of defendant lawyers, they are only offering a good quality legal service, hence why David Pugh won his award. Updated on 13/11/2008
|