My Lords, I agree with what has just been said by the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, and I speak only with reference to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, of which I was a member for about nine years. We regularly considered cases from all over the world—the High Court of Australia, the Supreme Court of the United States, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, or any court that had similar law to the law of England and Wales. We considered them, but none of them was, or is today, binding. It is absolutely unnecessary to put this in, and I have to say I find it offensive to judges who have treated these cases in the way I have just explained for many years. I was on the Bench for 35 years, and I looked at these cases many times. I would be offended to be told I could not apply them as part of English law, because I knew that from my childhood, for goodness’ sake.
Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Butler-Sloss
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 March 2023.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
828 c592 
Session
2022-23
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-03-13 17:16:45 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-03-06/23030613000021
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-03-06/23030613000021
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-03-06/23030613000021