UK Parliament / Open data

Judicial Review and Courts Bill

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have spoken in this debate. As my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer said, this suite of amendments was really an attempt to get clarity. Some of them were probing amendments, and some we may return to at a later stage. As my noble and learned friend said, there are potential conflicts, and he gave the example of that between subsection (8)(c) and (d). Those two elements would need to be considered within the broader context of the whole of subsection (8).

7.45 pm

The noble and learned Lord, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, was more of relaxed, if I can say that, about this group of amendments. My understanding of what the noble and learned Lord said was that they wanted maximum flexibility. He was relaxed also about the words “may” and “must” in the legislation. But the noble Lord, Lord Marks, put his finger on it when he said this group of amendments is really aimed at trying to take the sting out of the Government’s proposals and provide greater clarity.

We have heard the Minister’s explanations regarding each of the amendments, and we will go away, read carefully what he has said and consider our position for the next stage of the Bill. But for now, I beg leave to withdraw Amendment 2.

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
819 c82 
Session
2021-22
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top