First Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation |
|
Lady Hermon: I want to make two short points. First, bearing in mind that the Minister has had to explain the composition of the Law Reform Advisory Committee, will he indicate to the committee that its website needs updating and extending? When I mentioned Mr. Justice Girvan, I was reading from the output on the website today. Secondly, could the Minister confirm, for the record, that the creation of the Law Commission, which is much needed to assist with codification of complex legislation in a range of areas of law, is not contingent upon the devolution of justice to the Assembly? Mr. Pearson: I am happy to pass on to the Law Reform Advisory Committee the point about updating its website. That reminds me that I should update my own website; I am sure that many other hon. Members are in a similar situation. Column Number: 12 The appointments of Mr. Justice Marrinan and Mr. Justice Morgan to the Law Reform Advisory Committee were confirmed only last week. Undoubtedly, they will receive a note from me or from officials very soon, informing them that they should give some attention to the website. As I said earlier, we do not believe that it is essential for a devolved Assembly to be up and running before a Law Commission is put in place, but we hope that that will be the case. We hope that a Law Commission would issue proposals to a Northern Ireland Assembly for its consideration. That would be our ideal way of moving forward. The hon. Member for North Down asked me to clarify three particular provisions in the legislation. She mentioned article 5, and I appreciate and sympathise with the personal circumstances that she faces. The answer to her question relates to the issue of enduring powers of attorney, a subject that is under consideration by the Office of Law Reform. If it would be helpful to the hon. Lady, I can offer her a meeting with officials, so that she can discuss that matter further. If she would then like to talk to me afterwards, we can see whether we can make progress on any necessary clarification of that area of the law. The hon. Lady also raised the issue of article 16 and referred specifically to engaged couples. The answer to her question is simple: yes. The abolition of the presumption of advancement will allow engaged couples who break off their engagement to decide themselves on the best way to split their assets. There will not be any presumption and the abolition applies in the same way to engaged couples as to married couples. The hon. Lady also asked for clarification on article 18. I can confirm that its abolition will not have retrospective effect. Finally, she asked when this will come into effect. I can confirm that the intention is that it will come into effect one month after the order is officially approved. With that, I believe that I have dealt with all the points. I see that I have not. Lady Hermon: It is only a small point. There is always intense sensitivity in matters relating to the engagement ring. It is all well and good for the Minister to say that the presumption of advancement is abolished and so the two individuals can agree to split up the tea set or whatever that they have been given by an auntie, but what happens to the engagement ring? Mr. Pearson: It will be up to the two individuals concerned to sort it out. We cannot prescribe in law that it goes to one party or the other. Lady Hermon: Actually, there was a common law presumption that when a ring was given by the fiancé to his fiancée, she would retain it. Have we now done away with that presumption? It seems a small point, but it is a sensitive one. The order states:
May we have clarification on that small point? Column Number: 13 Mr. Pearson: I seem to remember my wife buying her own engagement ring. [Hon. Members: “Shame.”] She was supporting me at the time. I am advised that the abolition of the presumption of advancement will not remove the fact that some objects can be recognised as a gift. The evidence will need to be looked at to see what the couple intended. We have had an interesting debate on a range of subjects, some of which are technical, some of which are matrimonial and some of which affect people’s daily lives. This is a sensible order. It tidies up the law in a number of respects. I commend it to the Committee. Column Number: 14 The Chairman: I thank Members for their consideration of this important piece of legislation. I thank the Minister for his helpful offer to meet with Lady Hermon and all those who have contributed to the debate. Question put and agreed to. Resolved,
Committee rose at nine minutes past Five o’clock. |
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2005 | Prepared 1 March 2005 |