My noble friend set a test for me that he knew I must fail, because the adjudicator does not have the power to impose a decision on a civil dispute—and because I failed this entirely arbitrary test, which he imposed with his customary skill, my argument was apparently nullified. Perhaps I may engage him by referring to another area of life in which there is a separation of powers. We have settled health and safety legislation in this country. Where there is a prosecution for breach of health and safety regulation before a criminal court, the court does not have the power to impose civil compensation, because that is not its function. However, it is a judicial process. Of course, another court can impose a civil remedy by awarding compensation for breach of health and safety regulations as an indication of negligence where somebody is injured, but it cannot impose a criminal penalty, because that is not its function. However, both courts have judicial functions. The fact that one court cannot impose its will on the jurisdiction of another does not nullify the fact that they both have judicial functions. Why does that logic not serve me well in this argument?
Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Browne of Ladyton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 26 June 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
738 c87GC 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-11-28 15:08:59 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2012-06-26/120626105000026
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2012-06-26/120626105000026
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2012-06-26/120626105000026