I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Hamwee. I am sure that the distinction between ““general conformity”” and ““strict conformity”” comes into the realms of ““adjacent”” and whatever the other phrase was. Some can read more into that than I can, but I am sure that it is intended to be helpful.
My final point relates to the question of court jurisdiction. I want to think about this, because I believe that the pass is being sold here and may indeed have been sold by Scottish Ministers. My colleagues in the Scottish Parliament will be fascinated that Mr Salmond and others were quite happy to trade off the jurisdiction of the Court of Session, if that is indeed what has happened; it is what I thought the Minister said. If matters happen to fall territorially within Scotland, the application should be to the Court of Session; if they fall territorially within England’s offshore waters, they should fall to the High Court. Ultimately there will be an appeal to what, in time, will be the Supreme Court.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Wallace of Tankerness
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 February 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c38 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:54:01 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530673
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530673
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530673