Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

I am happy to confirm that this particular definition is not directly related to saving money. It is there because it is a definition that works. Amendment 23 goes beyond amendment 92 in referring also to the relationship between those involved. It would cover"““intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality.””" This part of the amendment is superfluous, because it duplicates sub-paragraph 7 of paragraph 10 of the schedule. The sub-paragraph relies on the definition of associated persons in the Family Law Act 1996, which is wide, and covers the relationships set out in the amendment and more. Amendment 91 also concerns the relationship between those involved. The Bill provides for legal aid to be available to victims of domestic violence for matters"““arising out of a family relationship””." The amendment would change the phrase ““family relationship”” to ““family or other intimate relationship””. It is unnecessary for the same reason as amendment 23. Paragraph 10(7) of the schedule defines a family relationship as one between persons who are associated with each other. The definition of ““associated persons”” in the 1996 Act, on which that paragraph relies, includes two people who"““have or have had an intimate personal relationship with each other which is or was of significant duration””." The wording of the amendment therefore appears to add nothing. Amendments 103 and 74 both set out a range of forms of evidence that would be accepted as demonstrating domestic violence for the purpose of qualifying for legal aid in private family law cases. Very similar amendments were debated in Committee, and in this case I can say to the right hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Joan Ruddock) that there would be economic consequences. We want genuine victims of domestic violence to have the benefit of legal aid in such cases, when they would be disadvantaged by facing their abuser as the other party. However, during consultation we have heard many concerns that the proposal in the amendments could lead to a rise in unfounded allegations, and we want to guard against that.