Clarify Compensation Act on apologies
IICSA · Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report · Issued 19 September 2019 · Addressed to: UK Government
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation, I
The government should introduce legislation revising the Compensation Act 2006 to clarify that section 2 facilitates apologies or offers of treatment or other redress to victims and survivors of child sexual abuse by institutions that may be vicariously liable for the actions or omissions of other persons, including the perpetrators.
IICSA, Accountability and Reparations Investigation Report · 19 Sep 2019 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- In May 2023, the government stated that it accepted the principle and would consult on strengthening existing judicial guidance on apologies (Government Response to IICSA Final Report, HM Government, May 2023).
- No published legislation amending the Compensation Act 2006 as specified has been identified to March 2026.
Response — verbatim from government
●UK Government
On 16 March 2021, the Ministry of Justice stated that it would consult on the subject of apologies, including consideration of the use of apologies in civil proceedings generally. On 4 May 2022, the Ministry of Justice confirmed that it still planned on consulting on the law of apologies and that the government would then consider necessary substantive reform.
UK Government · 22 May 2023 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
No published activity has been recorded against this recommendation yet.
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.