House of Lords Amendments

House of Lords

Session 2006 - 07
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
commons INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU
[The page and line references are to HL Bill 19, the bill as first printed for the Lords.]
Clause 2
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 2
2
Page 2, line 29, at end insert—

“(d)
a duty owed to anyone held in custody.”

COMMONS disAGREEMENT and amendment in lieu

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose

Amendment 10A in lieu.

lords insistence and reason

The Lords insist on their Amendment 2 for the following Reason—
2A
Because it is appropriate that a relevant duty of care should be owed to anyone held in

custody

COMMONS INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons insist on their disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos. 2, 3,

5, 6 and 10, do not insist on their Amendment 10A in lieu but propose Amendments 10C

and 10D in lieu.

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 3
3
Page 3, line 12, at end insert—

““custody” includes being held in prison, secure mental healthcare

facilities, secure children’s homes, secure training centres,

immigration removal centres, court cells and police cells, and being

subject to supervision by court, prisoner and detainee escort

services;”

HL Bill 76 54/2

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
2

COMMONS disAGREEMENT and amendment in lieu

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose

Amendment 10A in lieu.

lords insistence and reason

The Lords insist on their Amendment 3 for the following Reason—
3A
Because it is appropriate that a relevant duty of care should be owed to anyone held in

custody

COMMONS INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons insist on their disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos. 2, 3,

5, 6 and 10, do not insist on their Amendment 10A in lieu but propose Amendments 10C

and 10D in lieu.
Clause 3
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 5
5
Page 3, line 37, leave out “or (b)” and insert “, (b) or (d)”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose

Amendment 10A in lieu.

lords insistence and reason

The Lords insist on their Amendment 5 for the following Reason—
5A
Because it is appropriate that a relevant duty of care should be owed to anyone held in

custody

COMMONS INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons insist on their disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos. 2, 3,

5, 6 and 10, do not insist on their Amendment 10A in lieu but propose Amendments 10C

and 10D in lieu.

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 6
6
Page 3, line 40, leave out “or (b)” and insert “, (b) or (d)”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose

Amendment 10A in lieu.

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
3

lords insistence and reason

The Lords insist on their Amendment 6 for the following Reason—
6A
Because it is appropriate that a relevant duty of care should be owed to anyone held in

custody

COMMONS INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons insist on their disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos. 2, 3,

5, 6 and 10, do not insist on their Amendment 10A in lieu but propose Amendments 10C

and 10D in lieu.
Clause 5
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 10
10
Page 5, line 8, leave out “or (b)” and insert “, (b) or (d)”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose

Amendment 10A in lieu—
10A
Page 2, line 43, at end insert—

“(5A)
The Secretary of State may by order make amendments to this section to the

effect that a duty of care owed by an organisation under the law of

negligence to a person who—

(a)
is in any specified form of custody or detention, or is otherwise on

premises of a specified description or on premises in specified

circumstances, and

(b)
is by reason of that fact a person for whose safety the organisation

is responsible,


is a “relevant duty of care”.

(5B)
An order under subsection (5A)—

(a)
may amend this Act so as to specify exceptions with respect to the

application of any provision contained in this section as a result of

such an order;

(b)
may make any amendment to this Act that is incidental or

supplemental to, or consequential on, an amendment made by such

an order.

(5C)
An order under subsection (5A) is subject to affirmative resolution

procedure.”

lords insistence and reason

The Lords insist on their Amendment 10 and disagree with the Commons in their

Amendment 10A in lieu for the following Reason—
10B
Because it is appropriate that a relevant duty of care should be owed to anyone held in

custody

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
4

COMMONS INSISTENCE, NON-INSISTENCE AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons insist on their disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos. 2, 3,

5, 6 and 10, do not insist on their Amendment 10A in lieu but propose Amendments 10C

and 10D in lieu—
10C
Page 2, line 31, leave out “subsection (1)” and insert “this Act”
10D
Page 13, line 3, at end insert the following new Clause—


“Power to extend meaning of “relevant duty of care”

(1)
The Secretary of State may by order make amendments to this Act to the

effect that a duty of care owed by an organisation under the law of

negligence to a person who—

(a)
is in any specified form of custody or detention, or is otherwise on

premises of a specified description or on premises in specified

circumstances, and

(b)
is by reason of that fact a person for whose safety the organisation

is responsible,


is a “relevant duty of care”.

(2)
An order under this section—

(a)
may amend this Act so as to specify exceptions, or to restrict or

disapply exceptions, as regards the application of any provision

contained in this Act as a result of such an order;

(b)
may make any amendment to this Act that is incidental or

supplemental to, or consequential on, an amendment made by such

an order.

(3)
An order under this section is subject to affirmative resolution procedure.”