Session 2010 - 12
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament


 
 

 

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders

Bill

MARSHALLED LIST OF MOTIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO BE MOVED ON

CONSIDERATION OF commons REASONS and Amendment

[The page and line references are to HL Bill 109, the bill as first printed for the Lords.]

MOTION A

LORDS AMENDMENT 1

Clause 1

1

Page 1, line 5, leave out from “secure” to end of line 6 and insert “(within the

 

resources made available and in accordance with this Part) that individuals have

 

access to legal services that effectively meet their needs”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 1 for the following Reason—

1A

Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the

 

Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this reason may be deemed

 

sufficient.

 

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

 

The Lords do not insist on their Amendment 1, but do propose Amendment 1B in lieu.

1B

Page 1, line 5, leave out subsection (1) and insert—

 

“(1)    

The Lord Chancellor shall exercise his powers under this Part with a view

 

to securing that individuals have access to legal services that effectively

 

meet their needs, subject to the resources which the Lord Chancellor

 

decides, in his discretion, to make available, and subject to the provisions

 

of this Part.”

 
 
HL Bill 141-I55/1

 
 

2

 
 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 1B for the following Reason—

1C

Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the

 

Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this reason may be deemed

 

sufficient.

 

A

 

Lord McNally to move, That this House do not insist on its Amendment 1B to

 

which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 1C.

 

MOTION B

 

LORDS AMENDMENTS 2 AND 196

2

Page 1, line 6, at end insert—

 

“( )    

In exercising the duty under subsection (1), the Lord Chancellor must

 

ensure that victims of domestic violence are able to access civil legal

 

services in accordance with the financial eligibility criteria in section 20

 

(financial resources).”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 2 for the following Reason—

2A

Because it would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons, and the

 

Commons do not offer any further Reason, trusting that this reason may be deemed

 

sufficient.

Schedule 1

196

Page 122, line 10, at end insert—

 

    “( )  

For the avoidance of doubt, no time limit shall operate in relation to any

 

evidence supporting an application for civil legal services under

 

paragraphs 10 and 11.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 196 for the following Reason—

196A

Because it is not appropriate to prevent a time limit being imposed in respect of evidence

 

supporting an application for civil legal aid under paragraph 10 or 11 of Part 1 of Schedule

 

1.

 

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

 

The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 2 and 196, but do propose Amendments 2B

 

and 196B in lieu.

2B

Page 121, line 31, at end insert—

 
 

 
 

3

 
 

“Domestic violence

 

      (1)  

For the purposes of this paragraph, evidence that abuse has occurred

 

may consist of one or more of the following (without limitation)—

 

(a)    

a relevant court conviction or police caution;

 

(b)    

a relevant court order (including without notice, ex parte, interim

 

or final orders), icluding a non-molestation undertaking or order,

 

occupation order, forced marriage protection order or other

 

protective injunction;

 

(c)    

evidence of a relevant criminal proceedings for an offence

 

concerning domestic violence or police report confirming

 

attandance at an incident resulting from domestic violence;

 

(d)    

evidence that a victim has been referred to a multi-agency risk

 

assessment conference, as a high risk victim of domestic violence,

 

and a plan has been put in place to protect that victim form

 

violence by the other party;

 

(e)    

a finding of fact in the family courts of domestic violence by the

 

other party giving rise to the risk of harm to the victim;

 

(f)    

a letter from the General Medical Council registered general

 

practitioner or other medical professional confirming that he or

 

she has examined the applicant and is satisfied that the applicant

 

had injuries or a condition consistent with those of a victim of

 

domestic violence;

 

(g)    

an undertaking given to a court by the alleged perpetrator of the

 

abuse that he or she will not approach the applicant in respect of

 

allegations of domestic violence;

 

(h)    

a letter from a social services department confirming its

 

involvement in providing services to the applicant in respect of

 

allegations of domestic violence;

 

(i)    

a letter of support or a report from a domestic violence support

 

organisation; or

 

(j)    

other well-founded evidence of abuse that is either—

 

(i)    

certified by a court; or

 

(ii)    

of a type prescribed in regulations.

 

      (2)  

For the avoidance of doubt, no evidence shall be deemed inadmissible

 

on the basis of expiration where the general limitation period under the

 

civil standard has not elapsed.”

196B

Page 121, line 47, at end insert—

 

    “(2)  

For the avoidance of doubt, no evidence supporting an application for

 

civil legal services under this paragraph shall be deemed inadmissible

 

on the basis of expiration where the general limitation period under the

 

civil standard has not elapsed.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2B and 196B for the following

 

Reason—

196C

Because it is appropriate for provision about evidence of abuse for the purposes of an

 

application for civil legal services described in paragraph 10 or 11 of Part 1 of Schedule 1

 
 

 
 

4

 
 

to be made by regulations.

 

B

 

Lord McNally to move, That this House do not insist on its Amendments 2B and

 

196B to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 196C.

 

B1

 

Baroness Scotland of Asthal to move, as an amendment to Motion B, leave out

 

from “House” to end and insert “do insist on its Amendments 2B and 196B”

 

MOTION C

 

LORDS AMENDMENT 31

Before Clause 43

31

Insert the following new Clause—

 

“Exception in respiratory (industrial disease or illness) cases

 

The changes made by sections 43, 45 and 46 of this Act do not apply in

 

relation to proceedings which include a claim for damages for respiratory

 

disease or illness (whether or not resulting in death) arising from industrial

 

exposure to harmful substance.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 31 for the following Reason—

31A

Because it is not appropriate to make an exception from clauses 43, 45 and 46 for

 

proceedings which include a claim for damages for respiratory disease or illness arising

 

from industrial exposure to harmful substances.

 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendment 31 for the following Reason—

31B

Because it is appropriate to make an exception from clauses 43, 45 and 46 for

 

proceedings which include a claim for damages for respiratory disease or illness

 

arising from industrial exposure to harmful substances.

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 31, but propose Amendment 31C in

 

lieu—

31C

Page 32, line 36, at end insert the following new Clause:—

 

         

“Sections 43 and 45 and diffuse mesothelioma proceedings

 

(1)    

Sections 43 and 45 may not be brought into force in relation to proceedings

 

relating to a claim for damages in respect of diffuse mesothelioma until the

 

Lord Chancellor has—

 
 

 
 

5

 
 

(a)    

carried out a review of the likely effect of those sections in relation

 

to such proceedings, and

 

(b)    

published a report of the conclusions of the review.

 

(2)    

In this section “diffuse mesothelioma” has the same meaning as in the

 

Pneumoconiosis etc (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979.”

 

C

 

Lord McNally to move, That this House do not insist on its Amendment 31 and

 

do agree with the Commons in their Amendment 31C.

 
 

 
 

6

 

 
contents
 

© Parliamentary copyright
Revised 25 April 2012