| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Jul 2003 : Column 470W—continued
Darmesh and Rashik Jamiet
Keith Vaz: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs when the case of Darmesh (date of birth 27 February 1973) and Rashik (8 December 1977) Jamiet under Ref MP2777 was received in the Lord Chancellor's Department from the Appeal Processing Centre. [125526]
Mr. Lammy: This case has not yet been received by the Immigration Appellate Authority (IAA). However, the Immigration and Nationality Directorate Appeals Processing Centre has advised us, that it was sent to the IAA on 11 July 2003.
EU Regulations
Bob Spink: To ask the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs how many regulations originating from the EU have been implemented by the Department in each of the past five years. [120833]
Mr. Lammy: Regulations are, in general, directly applicable in the Member States, without the need for further incorporation into national law. However, some Regulations require UK measures to make them workable and enforceable.
The number of regulations originating from the EU, in which the former Lord Chancellor's Department had the lead, which have come into force in the last five years is as follows:
| 1998 | 0 |
| 1999 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
| 2001 | 2 |
| 2002 | 2 |
Additionally, Council Regulation (EC) 1206/2001, which came partially into force on 1 July 2001, will come fully into force on 1 January 2004.
Joint Guarantors
Mr. Hunter: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs, if he will take measures to ensure that no guarantor of a joint and several personal guarantee is able to default; and if he will make a statement. [124494]
Mr. Lammy:
We have no plans to introduce such measures. There is existing case law regulating the relationship between creditors, debtors and their guarantors. The House of Lords has ruled that banks (or a creditor in the same position) should inquire into the status and competence of an individual as guarantor. This is particularly so when the individual is guaranteeing the debts of their spouse or partner. This case applied to a single guarantee, but the principle would extend to joint guarantees.
17 Jul 2003 : Column 471W
Judicial Appointments Commission
Mr. Cash: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what limits will be placed on the members of the Judicial Appointments Commission in discussing individual cases with ministers. [126747]
Mr. Leslie: On 14 July 2003, the Government published a consultation paper entitled Constitutional Reform: A New Way of Appointing Judges. The paper seeks views on proposals for the establishment of the new Judicial Appointments Commission. Under the Government's preferred model, the Commission would take responsibility for the entire appointments process prior to the appointment itself. Ministers would not take any part in that process. Under this model, the Commission would generally put forward only one name to the Secretary of State for each appointment. The Secretary of State would either accept that recommendation and make the appointment (or pass the recommendation to the Prime Minister or The Queen as appropriate) or formally reject that recommendation and require another to be put forward. The preferred model is described in more detail in paragraphs 42–48 and 52 of the consultation paper (available in the Members' Library and on the internet at www.dca.gov.uk/consult/iacommission).
Mr. Cash: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether the decisions of the Judicial Appointments Commission and the Secretary of State in respect of judicial appointments will be subject to judicial review. [126749]
Mr. Leslie: The decisions of public authorities are generally susceptible to judicial review, applying the ordinary principles of public administrative law. It is for the courts to decide whether to admit an application in any particular case.
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what discussions he had with the governing authorities of (a) Anguilla, (b) Bermuda, (c) the British Virgin Islands, (d) Cayman Islands, (e) Falkland Islands, (f) Gibraltar, (g) Montserrat, (h) St. Helena, (i) the Turks and Caicos Islands, (j) the Isle of Man, (k) Jersey (l) Guernsey, (m) New Zealand, (n) Antigua and Barbuda, (o) Bahamas, (p) Barbados, (q) Belize, (r) Dominica, (s) Grenada, (t) Jamaica, (u) St. Christopher and Nevis, (v) Saint Lucia, (w) Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, (x) Trinidad and Tobago, (y) Kiribati, (z) Tuvalu and (aa) Mauritius on plans to change the legal responsibilities of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as a court of appeal. [126772]
Mr. Leslie:
None. The Government are proposing no changes to the jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in relation to its status as a court of appeal for the jurisdictions listed in the question. In that capacity, it is acting as a court of appeal for independent jurisdictions. It does not belong to the UK alone. Instead of the Law Lords being appointed to the Judicial Committee, the members of the Supreme Court
17 Jul 2003 : Column 472W
would be so appointed. The right of other senior judges who are Privy Counsellors to sit on the Judicial Committee would remain untouched.
Law Society
Mrs. Helen Clark: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what assessment he has made of the intervention of the Law Society in its role as regulator of (a) sole practitioner solicitors and (b) legal firms. [126241]
Mr. Lammy: The Law Society is responsible for the regulation of solicitors. Its Office for the Supervision of Solicitors has an Investigation and Enforcement Department, which deals with alleged fraud and serious misconduct which may lead to intervention in the firms concerned. The Government have made no assessment of the Society's interventions into sole practitioners or other solicitors' firms.
Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement)
Mr. Tynan: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders his Department (a) enforced overseas and (b) received notification of from overseas and enforced in the UK, in each of the last five years, broken down by state. [125667]
Mr. Lammy: England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland work under devolved powers to establish jurisdiction in the UK and deal with applications from abroad. The numbers for each are listed in the tables.
(5) 2003 figures to June 30 only.
17 Jul 2003 : Column 474W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |