House of Lords
Session 2002 - 03
Publications on the internet
Minutes and Order Papers

Minutes and Order Paper - Minutes of Proceedings


 

HOUSE OF LORDS

(Sitting for Judicial Business)

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

Die Jovis 31° Julii 2003

The House met at two o’clock.

PRAYERS were read by the Lord Bishop of Gloucester.

Judicial Business

1.  Mulkerrins (formerly Woodward) (FC) (Appellant) v. Pricewaterhouse Coopers (a firm) (formerly trading as Coopers & Lybrand (a firm)) (Respondents)—It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 48th Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 13th December 2000 be set aside and that the Order of Mr Jules Sher QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) of 15th February 2000 be restored, save for paragraph 6; and that the respondents do pay to the appellant her costs in the Court of Appeal and before this House, the amount of such last-mentioned costs to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties. [2003] UKHL 41

2.  Regina v. Parole Board and another (Respondents) ex parte Giles (FC) (Appellant)—It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 49th Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 4th July 2002 be affirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs; that the amounts thereof, if any, to be paid by the appellant and to be paid out of the Community Legal Service Fund be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments in accordance with section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999; and that the costs of the appellant be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999. [2003] UKHL 42

3.  London Borough of Harrow (Appellants) v. Qazi (FC) (Respondent)—It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 50th Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 3rd December 2001 be set aside and that the Order of Mr Recorder Williamson of 8th June 2001 be restored; and that the respondent do pay to the appellants their costs in the Court of Appeal and before this House; that the amounts thereof, if any, to be paid by the respondent and to be paid out of the Community Legal Service Fund be determined by a Costs Judge for those costs incurred in the Court of Appeal and certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments for those incurred before this House in accordance with section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999; and that the costs of the respondent be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999. [2003] UKHL 43

4.  Moyna (Respondent) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (formerly against the Social Security Commissioner) (Appellant)—It was moved by the Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, That the 51st Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 27th March 2002 be set aside and the decision of the Disability Appeal Tribunal of 27th January 1999 be restored; and that there be no order as to costs in the Court of Appeal and before this House. [2003] UKHL 44

5.  Thomson (AP) (Respondent) v. Kvaerner Govan Limited (Appellants) (Scotland)—It was moved by the Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, That the 52nd Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the interlocutor of the First Division of the Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland of 10th May 2002 be recalled and that the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary of 16th January 1998 be restored; that the respondent do pay to the appellants their expenses before the Lord Ordinary and in respect of the reclaiming motion; that the amount of the appellants’ costs before this House to be paid by the respondent as an assisted person be modified to nil under the provisions of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986; and that the costs of the appellants in this House be paid out of the Legal Aid Fund in accordance with section 19 of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986, such order to be suspended for four weeks to allow the Legal Aid Board to object if they wish. [2003] UKHL 45

6.  Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma (Appellants) v. ASDA Stores Limited and others (Respondents)—The Cause was further considered, pursuant to the Order of the House of 8th February 2001 whereby certain questions were referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities, the Judgment of that Court having been given on 20th May 2003; it was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 1st December 1998 be affirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs before this House and before the Court of Justice of the European Communities, the amount thereof to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties. [2003] UKHL 46

7.  Tomlinson (FC) (Original Respondent and Cross-appellant) v. Congleton Borough Council and others (Original Appellants and Cross-respondents)—It was moved by the Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, That the 53rd Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the appeal be allowed and the cross-appeal dismissed; that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 14th March 2002 be set aside and the Order of Mr Justice Jack of 21st March 2001 be restored; that the original respondent do pay to the original appellants their costs in the Court of Appeal and of the appeal and cross-appeal to this House; that the amounts thereof, if any, to be paid by the respondent and to be paid out of the Community Legal Service Fund be determined by a Costs Judge for those costs incurred in the Court of Appeal and certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments for those incurred before this House in accordance with section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999; and that the costs of the original respondent be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999. [2003] UKHL 47

8.  Lloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings and others (Original Respondents and Cross-appellants) v. Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Company Limited (Original Appellants and Cross-respondents)—It was moved by the Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, That the 54th Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the appeal be allowed and the cross-appeal dismissed; that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 8th November 2001 and the Order of Mr Justice Moore-Bick of 16th October 2000 be set aside; that the two issues ordered by Mr Justice Morison on 6th April 2000 to be tried as preliminary issues be answered in the negative; that the original respondents do pay to the original appellants their costs of and occasioned by the trial of the preliminary issues before Mr Justice Moore-Bick and of the appeals to the Court of Appeal and to this House, the amount of such last-mentioned costs to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties; and that the action be remitted to the Commercial Court. [2003] UKHL 48

9.  Official Receiver (Appellant) v. Wadge Rapps & Hunt (a firm) and another and two other actions—It was moved by the Lord Steyn, That the 55th Report from the Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 25th July 2001 and the Orders of His Honour Judge Weeks (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) of 14th November 2000 be set aside save as to costs; that it be declared that “The powers conferred on the Official Receiver by section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 are conferred for the better discharge of his wider statutory functions, both powers and duties, in relation to the company being wound-up and such functions include the provision of information to the Secretary of State for the purpose of disqualification proceedings.”; and that there be no order as to costs before this House. [2003] UKHL 49

10.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department and another (Respondents) ex parte Anufrijeva (FC) (Appellant)—Further to the Judgment of the House of 26th June last (42nd Report from the Appellate Committee, [2003] UKHL 36), it was ordered that the respondents to pay to the appellant her costs before Sir Christopher Bellamy, in the Court of Appeal and before this House, the amount of such last-mentioned costs to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties; and that the costs of the appellant be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999.

11.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Al-Hasan (FC) (Petitioner)—

12.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Carroll (FC) (Petitioner)—

    It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 64th Report from the Appeal Committee (HL Paper 148) be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered that the Orders made pursuant to the 33rd Report from the Appeal Committee on 13 March 2003, refusing leave to appeal to Al-Hasan and Carroll, be vacated; and that the petitions be reconsidered after the judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Ezeh & Connors v. United Kingdom and after the petitioners have had an opportunity to amend their petitions in the light of that judgment.

13.  Regina v. G and another (Appellants) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))—Upon report from the Appellate Committee, it was ordered, pursuant to section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, that no newspaper report or programme service of the proceedings in this House shall reveal the name, address, or include any particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the minors concerned in this appeal and that no picture shall be published in any newspaper or included in any programme service as being or including the said minors.

14.  Hinchy (Respondent) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Appellant) (England)—The appeal of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was presented and it was ordered, notwithstanding Standing Order VI, that the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 2nd October next (lodged 21st July).

15.  Sirius International Insurance Company (Publ) (Appellants) v. FAI General Insurance Limited and others (Respondents) (England)—The appeal of Sirius International Insurance Company (Publ) was presented and it was ordered, notwithstanding Standing Order VI, that the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 2nd October next (lodged 21st July).

16.  Jindal Iron and Steel Co Limited and others (Appellants) and others v. Islamic Solidarity Shipping Company Jordan Inc (Respondents) (England)—The appeal of Jindal Iron and Steel Co Limited was presented and it was ordered, notwithstanding Standing Order VI, that the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 2nd October next (lodged 22nd July).

17.  Gorringe (by her litigation friend June Elizabeth Todd) (FC) (Appellant) v. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (Respondents) (England)—The appeal of Denise Gorringe was presented and it was ordered, notwithstanding Standing Order VI, that the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 2nd October next. The appellant’s certificate of public funding was lodged (lodged 29th July).

18.  Beynon and Partners (Respondents) v. Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise (Appellants) (England)—The appeal of Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise was presented and it was ordered, notwithstanding Standing Order VI, that the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 2nd October next.

19.  Regina v. Z (Respondent) (2003) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))—The appeal of the Crown Prosecution Service was presented and ordered to be prosecuted subject to the procedures applicable thereto (lodged 28th July).

20.  In re C (children)—The petition of the father praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 17th July).

21.  Hyett (Respondent) v. Stanley and another (Petitioners) and others—The petition of Anthony James Stanley and Joan Maria Page praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 17th July).

22.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Petitioner) ex parte Razgar (Respondent) and two other actions—The petition of the Secretary of State for the Home Department praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 18th July).

23.  Fytche (Petitioner) v. Wincanton Logistics plc (Respondents)—The petition of Bryan Evans Fytche praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 23rd July).

24.  Greenalls Management Limited (Respondents) v. Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise (Petitioners)—The petition of Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 25th July).

25.  Mattis (Respondent) v. Pollock (t/a Flamingos Nightclub) (Petitioner)—The petition of Gerrard Pollock praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

26.  Regina v. London Borough of Lewisham (Respondents) ex parte Bello (Petitioner)—The petition of Tiamiyu Adebayo Bello praying for leave to appeal was presented without payment of the fee, such fee having been waived by the Appeal Committee pursuant to Standing Order XIII; the said petition was referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 19th March).

27.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Ay (Petitioner)—The petition of Yurdurgal Ay praying for leave to appeal was presented without payment of the fee, such fee having been waived by the Appeal Committee pursuant to Standing Order XIII; the said petition was referred to an Appeal Committee.

28.  Regina v. Clark (Respondent)—The petition of the Crown Prosecution Service praying for leave to appeal in accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee (lodged 22nd July).

29.  Regina v. Marchant and another (Respondents)—The petition of the Crown Prosecution Service praying for leave to appeal in accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

30.  Campbell (Petitioner) v. News Group Newspapers Limited and another (Respondents)—The petition of Alan Eric Campbell praying for leave to appeal notwithstanding that the time limited by Standing Order II has expired was presented without payment of the fee, such fee having been waived by the Appeal Committee pursuant to Standing Order XIII; the said petition was referred to an Appeal Committee.

31.  In re O (Petitioner) (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus)—The petition of O praying for an extension of time within which the petition may be lodged and for leave to appeal in accordance with the Administration of Justice Act 1960 was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

32.  Regina v. Police Complaints Authority (Respondents) ex parte Green (FC) (Appellant)—The petition of the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police praying for leave to intervene in the said appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

33.  Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department and another (Respondents) ex parte IH (FC) (Appellant)—The petition of the Royal College of Psychiatrists praying for leave to intervene in the said appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal Committee.

34.  Bakewell Management Limited (Respondents) v. Brandwood and others (Appellants)—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee (lodged 18th July).

35.  Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs and Excise (Appellants) v. Zielinski Baker & Partners Limited (Respondents)—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee (lodged 22nd July).

36.  A (Respondent) v. Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (Appellant) and another—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee (lodged 29th July).

37.  Kirin-Amgen Inc and others (Appellants) v. Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others (Respondents)—

38.  Kirin-Amgen Inc and others (Respondents) v. Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others (Appellants)—

    (Conjoined Appeals)

    The appeals were set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee (lodged 30th July).

39.  Do (FC) (Appellant) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.

40.  Regina v. Jones (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.

41.  J I MacWilliam Company Inc (Respondents) v. Mediterranean Shipping Company SA (Appellants)—The petition of the appellants, praying that the appeal be restored and for leave to give security for costs notwithstanding that the time limited by Standing Order V has expired (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto), was presented; and it was ordered as prayed.

42.  Regina v. Ashworth Hospital Authority (Appellants) and another ex parte Brogan (Respondent)—The petition of the appellants, praying that the appeal be restored and for leave to give security for costs notwithstanding that the time limited by Standing Order V has expired (the agents for the respondent consenting thereto), was presented; and it was ordered as prayed.

43.  Jerome (Appellant) v. Kelly (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) (Respondent)—The petition of the appellant praying that the time for lodging the statement and appendix and setting down the cause for hearing might be extended to 2nd October next (the agents for the respondent consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 22nd July).

44.  McCabe (Respondent) v. Cornwall County Council and others (Appellants)—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 2nd October next (the agents for the respondent consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 22nd July).

45.  Glasgow City Council (Respondents) v. Caststop Limited (Appellants) (Scotland)—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 2nd October next or to the third sitting day after the next ensuing meeting of the House (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 23rd July).

46.  Do (FC) (Appellant) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)—The petition of the appellant praying that the time for lodging the statement and appendix and setting down the cause for hearing might be extended to 31st July next (the agents for the respondent consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 24th July).

47.  Kirin-Amgen Inc and others (Appellants) v. Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others (Respondents)—

48.  Kirin-Amgen Inc and others (Respondents) v. Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others (Appellants)—

    The petition of the appellants praying that the appeals be conjoined; that they be allowed to lodge one statement, one appendix and separate cases and that the appellants and respondents be separately represented in respect of the two appeals (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 30th July).

49.  Moy v. Pettman Smith (a firm) (Respondents) and another (Appellant)—It was ordered that the appellant be allowed to prosecute the appeal without giving the usual security for costs as required by Standing Order (lodged 24th July).

50.  Regina v. Ashworth Hospital Authority (Appellants) and another ex parte Brogan (Respondent)—It was ordered that the appellants be allowed to prosecute the appeal without giving the usual security for costs as required by Standing Order.

51.  Venables and others (Appellants) v. Hornby (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) (Respondent)—The order of commitment of 31st March last was discharged.

52.  In re I (FC) (Respondent) (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus)—The respondent’s certificate of public funding was lodged.

53.  Regina v. Durham Constabulary and another (Appellant) ex parte R (FC) (Respondent) (Criminal Appeal from Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice)—The respondent’s certificate of public funding was lodged.

54.  Regina v. Durham Constabulary (Appellants) and another ex parte R (FC) (Respondent) (Criminal Appeal from Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice)—The respondent’s certificate of public funding was lodged.

55.  Vowles (FC) (Respondent) v. Evans and others (Petitioners)—The respondent’s certificate of public funding was lodged.

56.  Regina v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Petitioner) ex parte Hooper and others (FC) (Respondents)—The certificates of public funding of Leslie William Withey, Andrew Walker Martin and Frank Naylor were lodged.

57.  Appeal Committee—The following Order was made pursuant to the 55th Report:

    Barnfather (Petitioner) v. London Borough of Islington and another (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.

58.  Appeal Committee—The following Order was made pursuant to the 61st Report:

    KR and others (Respondents) v. Royal & Sun Alliance plc (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.

59.  Appeal Committee—The 69th Report was made; the Appeal Committee reported that they had met and had heard Counsel; the report was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Vowles (FC) (Respondent) v. Evans and others (Petitioners)—That leave to appeal be refused; and that the costs of the respondent be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999.

60.  Appeal Committee—The 70th Report from the Appeal Committee was made and ordered to be printed (HL Paper 161). The Report was agreed to and the following order was made—

    Davidson (AP) (Respondent) v. Scottish Ministers (Appellants) (Scotland)—That the petition of the respondent, praying that the appeal be dismissed as inadmissible, be dismissed.

61.  Davidson (AP) (Respondent) v. Scottish Ministers (Appellants) (Scotland)—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 11th September next (the agents for the respondent consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed.

62.  Appeal Committee—The 71st Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Buchanan (Appellant) v. Alba Diagnostics Limited (Respondents) (Scotland)—That the appeal be set down for hearing; that the appellant’s case be lodged by 10th October next; on default the respondents to be at liberty to apply for the appeal to be dismissed for want of prosecution.

63.  Appeal Committee—The 72nd Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Regina v. Police Complaints Authority (Respondents) ex parte Green (FC) (Appellant)—That the petition of the Crown Prosecution Service that they might be heard or otherwise intervene in the said appeal be allowed to the extent that they may lodge written submissions only.

64.  Appeal Committee—The 73rd Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Regina v. Her Majesty’s Coroner for the Western District of Somerset (Respondent) and another (Appellant) ex parte Middleton (FC) (Respondent)—That the petition of Inquest and its associated charitable trust that they might be heard or otherwise intervene in the said appeal be allowed to the extent that they may lodge written submissions only.

65.  Appeal Committee—The 74th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made—

    Scutts (suing by his father and litigation friend) (FC) (Petitioner) v. Keyse and another (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999; 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.

    ABCI (formerly Arab Business Consortium International Finance and Investment Company) (Body Corporate) (Petitioners) v. Banque Franco-Tunisienne and others (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.

    Regina v. Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges (Respondents) ex parte Lambiris (Petitioner)—That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 14th August next.

    E (FC) (Petitioner) v. London Borough of Newham and others (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999; 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.

    Mersey Care NHS Trust (Petitioners) v. Ackroyd (Respondent)—That the respondent be invited to lodge objections by 14th August next.

66.  Appeal Committee—The 75th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made—

    Regina v. Walls (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 14th August next.

    Yeboah (Respondent) v. Crofton (Petitioner)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondent be at liberty to apply for his 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.

    Regina v. Immigration Appeal Tribunal (Respondents) ex parte Anufrijevas (FC) (Petitioner) and another—That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 14th August next.

    A and others (Petitioners) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 14th August next.

    South Bucks District Council and another (Respondents) v. Porter (FC) (Petitioner)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 14th August next.

    Regina v. Safi and others (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused.

    X (FC) and another (FC) (Petitioners) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 14th August next.

67.  Appeal Committee—The 76th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Regina v. Police Complaints Authority (Respondents) ex parte Green (FC) (Appellant)—That the petition of the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police that he might be heard or otherwise intervene in the said appeal be allowed.

68.  Appeal Committee—The 77th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made—

    Mortgage Agency Services Number Two Limited (Respondents) v. Chater and another (Petitioner)—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.

    Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council (Respondents) v. Jones and another (personal representatives of the estate of William John Watkins (deceased)) (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.

    Adams (Respondent) v. Bracknell Forest Borough Council (Petitioners)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 14th August next.

    McManus (Petitioner) v. Sharif (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondent be at liberty to apply for her 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.

    Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Inland Revenue (Petitioners) v. Eversden and another (as executors of the will of Margaret Hunter Greenstock (deceased)) (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.

    Holder (FC) (Petitioner) v. Law Society (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999; 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.

69.  Appeal Committee—The 78th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—

    Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Ay (Petitioner)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondent be at liberty to apply for his 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.

The House was adjourned at half-past two o’clock

to Monday 8th September, half-past two o’clock.

 
 
 
House of Lords home page Houses of Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries ordering index


© Parliamentary copyright 2003
Prepared: 1 august 2003