House of Commons portcullis
House of Commons
Session 2008 - 09
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament


 
 

 

Coroners and Justice Bill

LORDS AMENDMENT IN LIEU, INSISTENCE AND REASONS

[The page and line references are to HL Bill 33, the bill as first printed for the Lords]

After Clause 5

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 1

1

Insert the following new Clause—

 

“Information for inquests

 

In section 15 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23)

 

(general safeguards), after subsection (4)(c) insert—

 

““(ca)    

it is necessary to ensure that an inquest has the information

 

it needs to enable the matters required to be ascertained by

 

the investigation to be ascertained;”.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

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

1A

Because intercepted material and related communications data, and information about the

 

circumstances in which they were obtained, should not be publicly disclosed.

 

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

 

The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 1, 2 and 216, but do propose Amendment 1B

 

in lieu.

Schedule 1

1B

Page 115, line 29, leave out sub-paragraph (1) and insert—

 

      (1)  

“Subject to sub-paragraph (2), a senior coroner must suspend an

 

investigation under this Part of this Act into a person’s death if—

 

(a)    

the Lord Chancellor requests the coroner to do so on the ground

 

that the cause of death is likely to be adequately investigated by

 
 
Bill 16954/4

 
 

2

 
 

an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 (c. 12) that is being or is

 

to be held,

 

(b)    

a senior judge has been appointed under that Act as chairman of

 

the inquiry, and

 

(c)    

the Lord Chief Justice has indicated approval to the Lord

 

Chancellor, for the purposes of this paragraph, of the

 

appointment of that judge.

 

            

In paragraph (b) “senior judge” means a judge of the High Court or the

 

Court of Appeal or a Justice of the Supreme Court.”

 

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 2

2

Insert the following new Clause—

 

“Amendment to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

 

(1)    

Section 18 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23)

 

(exceptions to section 17) is amended as follows.

 

(2)    

In subsection (7), after paragraph (c) insert—

 

“(d)    

a disclosure to a coronial judge or to a person appointed as

 

counsel to an inquest or to members of a jury at an inquest

 

or to an interested person in which the coronial judge has

 

ordered the disclosure.”

 

(3)    

After subsection (8A) insert—

 

“(8B)    

A coronial judge shall not order a disclosure under subsection

 

(7)(d) except where the judge is satisfied that the circumstances of

 

the case make the disclosure necessary to enable the matters

 

required to be ascertained by the investigation to be ascertained.

 

(8C)    

An order for disclosure made under subsection (7)(d) may include

 

directions enabling the redaction of any material relating to the

 

method or means by which the information was obtained.”

 

(4)    

After subsection (13) insert—

 

“(14)    

In this section “interested person” has the same meaning as in

 

section 38 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.

 

(15)    

In this section “coronial judge” means a judge nominated by the

 

Lord Chief Justice under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to

 

conduct an investigation into a person’s death and who has agreed

 

to do so.””

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

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

2A

Because intercepted material and related communications data, and information about the

 

circumstances in which they were obtained, should not be publicly disclosed.

 
 
Bill 16954/4

 
 

3

 
 

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

 

The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 1, 2 and 216, but do propose Amendment 1B

 

in lieu.

Clause 61

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 59

59

Leave out Clause 61

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 59 for the following Reason—

59A

Because section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 makes unnecessary provision.

 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendments 59, 119, 121, 236 and 239 for the following

 

Reason—

59B

Because the provision made by section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 is necessary.

Clause 165

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 119

119

Page 111, line 26, leave out paragraph (b)

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 119 for the following Reason—

119A

Because section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 makes unnecessary provision.

 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendments 59, 119, 121, 236 and 239 for the following

 

Reason—

119B

Because the provision made by section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 is necessary.

 

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 121

121

Page 111, line 37, leave out sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii)

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 121 for the following Reason—

121A

Because section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 makes unnecessary provision.

 
 
Bill 16954/4

 
 

4

 
 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendments 59, 119, 121, 236 and 239 for the following

 

Reason—

121B

Because the provision made by section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 is necessary.

Schedule 20

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 216

216

Page 212, line 28, at end insert—

 

“3A      

Section (Amendment to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) has

 

effect in relation to investigations that have begun, but have not been

 

concluded, before the day on which that section comes into force (as well

 

as to inquests beginning on or after that day).”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 216 for the following Reason—

216A

Because it is consequential on Lords Amendment No. 2 to which the Commons disagree.

 

LORDS NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

 

The Lords do not insist on their Amendments 1, 2 and 216, but do propose Amendment 1B

 

in lieu.

Schedule 21

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 236

236

Page 224, leave out line 38

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 236 for the following Reason—

236A

Because section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 makes unnecessary provision.

 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendments 59, 119, 121, 236 and 239 for the following

 

Reason—

236B

Because the provision made by section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 is necessary.

 

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 239

239

Page 224, leave out lines 39 and 40

 
 
Bill 16954/4

 
 

5

 
 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 239 for the following Reason—

239A

Because section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 makes unnecessary provision.

 

LORDS INSISTENCE AND REASON

 

The Lords insist on their Amendments 59, 119, 121, 236 and 239 for the following

 

Reason—

239B

Because the provision made by section 29JA of the Public Order Act 1986 is necessary.

 
 
Bill 16954/4

 
 

6

 
Bill 16954/4

 
contents
 
House of Commons home page Houses of Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Revised 12 November 2009