House of Lords - Minute
       
House of Lords
Session 1999-2000
Publications on the internet
Minutes and Order Papers

Minutes and Order Paper - Minutes of Proceedings


 

HOUSE OF LORDS

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

Die Jovis 22° Junii 2000

The House met at two o’clock.

PRAYERS were read by the Lord Bishop of Oxford.

Judicial Business

1. Wildtree Hotels Limited and others (Appellants) v. London Borough of Harrow (Respondents)—The Report from the Appellate Committee was agreed to; it was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 11th June 1998 be affirmed, save that paragraphs 2 and 4 be set aside; that it be declared that: “Compensation is payable under s. 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 where the interference with a legal right in respect of land is only temporary and where after such temporary interference the value of the land or the interest in the land has ceased to be affected at the valuation date.”; that there be no order as to costs in the Court of Appeal; and that the respondents do pay to the appellants half of their costs before this House, the amount thereof to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

2. Regina v. Z (Respondent) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))—The Report from the Appellate Committee was agreed to; it was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 3rd December 1999 and the Order of Judge Gerber of 11th October 1999 be set aside; that part A of the certified question be answered “Yes, if the evidence is relevant to offence A” and that part B be answered “Yes, if the evidence is relevant to offence A and admissible under the similar facts rule, but subject in both cases to the discretion of the judge to exclude the evidence after weighing its prejudicial effect against its probative force or under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.”; and that the cause be remitted to the Central Criminal Court for trial.

3. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (Petitioners) v. Baker Norton Pharmaceuticals Inc and others (Respondents)—The petition of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

4. Amoco (U.K.) Exploration Company (a company incorporated in Delaware, USA) and others (Appellants) v. Teesside Gas Transportation Limited (Respondents)—

5. Amoco (U.K.) Exploration Company (a company incorporated in Delaware, USA) and others (Appellants) v. Imperial Chemical Industries plc and others (Respondents)—

    (Consolidated Appeals)—

    The petition of the appellants praying that the time for lodging the statement and appendix and setting down the cause for hearing might be extended to 29th June next (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed.

6. Appeal Committee—The following Order was made pursuant to the 49th Report:

    Regina v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (Petitioners) ex parte Newfields Developments Limited (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be given on terms that the petitioners do pay the respondents’ costs before this House in any event, that the petitioners do not seek to disturb the Order for costs made in the Court of Appeal; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 6th July next.

7. Appeal Committee—The 54th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made—

    Aldrich and others (Petitioners) v. Norwich Union Life Insurance Company Limited (formerly Norwich Union Life Insurance Society) (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

    Norwich Union Life and Pensions Limited (formerly Norwich Union Life Insurance Society) (Respondents) v. Qureshi (Petitioner) and another—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

    Uratemp Ventures Limited (Respondents) v. Collins (A.P.) (Petitioner) and one other action—That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 6th July next.

    Rugg (suing by his father and next friend Frederick Henry Rugg) (A.P.) (Petitioner) v. Marriott (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Act 1988; and that the respondent be at liberty to apply for his costs in accordance with direction 5.1(c) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

    Stocznia Gdanska SA (Respondents) v. Latreefers Inc (Petitioners)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

    Woolwich plc (Respondents) v. Gomm (A.P.) (Petitioner) and another—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Act 1988; and that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(c) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.

    Regina v. Dimsey (Petitioner)—That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 6th July next.

    Kenyon-Brown (Respondent) v. Desmond Banks & Co (Petitioners)—That leave to appeal be given, and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 6th July next.

The House was adjourned during pleasure.

The House was resumed.

Papers

8. Command Papers—The following papers were presented to the House by command of Her Majesty and ordered to lie on the Table:

    1. Copper—Terms of Reference of the International Copper Study Group;      (4738)

    2. European Communities—Partnership and Co-operation Agreement Establishing a Partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Uzbekistan of the other part with Final Act.      (4735)

9. Affirmative Instruments—The following instruments were laid before the House for approval by resolution and ordered to lie on the Table:

    1. Draft Insider Dealing (Securities and Regulated Markets) (Amendment) Order 2000;

    2. Draft Education (School Government) (Terms of Reference) (England) Regulations 2000;

    3. Draft National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 (Amendment) Regulations 2000.

10. Negative Instrument—The following instrument was laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table:

    London Cab Order 1934 (Modification) Order 2000, laid under the Greater London Authority Act 1999.      (1666)

11. Papers not subject to parliamentary proceedings—The following papers were laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table:

    1. Treasury Minute of 22nd June directing the application of certain receipts as appropriations in aid of the votes specified in the revised estimated and summer supplementary estimates for 1999-2000, laid under the Public Accounts and Charges Act 1891;

    2. Report for 1999 on the Operation of the Chemical Weapons Act 1996, laid under that Act;

    3. Report for 1999-2000 of the Parades Commission for Northern Ireland, laid under the Public Processions (Northern Ireland) Act 1998;

    4. Report and Accounts for 1999 of the Construction Industry Training Board, laid under the Industrial Training Act 1982.

Public Business

12. Child Support, Pensions and Welfare Bill—The report was received; amendments were moved and (by leave of the House) withdrawn; amendments were disagreed to (see division lists 1 and 2); further consideration on report was adjourned.

13. Mutual companies—The Lord Faulkner of Worcester asked Her Majesty’s Government what they consider to be the role of strong mutual companies in promoting a healthy and competitive market in financial services; after debate, the question was answered by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey.

14. Child Support, Pensions and Welfare Bill—The bill was further considered on report; amendments were agreed to; amendments were moved and (by leave of the House) withdrawn; an amendment was negatived; an amendment was disagreed to (see division list 3); further consideration on report was adjourned after amendment 73.

The House was adjourned at twenty-five minutes before midnight

till tomorrow, eleven o’clock.

MICHAEL DAVIES

Cler: Parliamentor:

 
 
 
continue to Order Paper
 
House of Lords home page Houses of Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries ordering index


© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared: 23 june 2000