I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. Does he accept that his remarks in his last few sentences do not really address what has come out of the debate on the subject? It is quite clear at present that the court would almost certainly not give judgment in such circumstances as he described; it would set aside the argument, not accept a judicial review and say that there was no reason to reopen the whole case. The court at present has that jurisdiction and has that opportunity if it wishes to use it. What the Government are trying to do with this clause is to remove any judicial discretion at all by the phrases “must not” or “may not”. The examples cited by the Minister stand in favour of the preservation of the existing law, not the changes in the way recommended or as enshrined in this Bill.
Criminal Justice and Courts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 28 July 2014.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
755 c1461 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-08-01 15:03:24 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-28/14072817000050
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-28/14072817000050
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-28/14072817000050