HL Deb 31 October 1990 vol 522 cc1856-7

6 Clause 79, page 85, line 45, at end insert: ("(3D) An appeal against any decision of a magistrates' court on a complaint for an order under subsection (2) above shall lie to the Crown Court at the instance of any party to the proceedings.")

The Commons disagreed to this amendment for the following reason—

6A because magistrates' courts proceedings under clause 79(2) are, as a result of the Lords Amendment in page 85, line 41, criminal in character and hence it is not necessary to provide for an appeal to the Crown Court.

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 6 to which the Commons have disagreed for the reason numbered 6A.

Amendment No. 6 was brought forward by the noble Lord, Lord Nathan, at Report stage in this House. The amendment was accepted by the Government because Clause 79 was at that stage drafted in terms which meant that proceedings for a nuisance order under subsections (1) and (2) of Clause 79 were civil in character. It was therefore necessary to make a specific provision for a right of appeal to the Crown Court against the decision of a magistrates' court under Clause 79(2) on a complaint made to it by a private individual for a nuisance order.

Subsequently at Third Reading in this House my noble friend Lord Byron brought forward an amendment designed to restore the current position under the Public Health Act 1936 under which a magistrates' court is empowered to impose a fine at the same time as it makes a nuisance order. The Government accepted that that amendment was necessary to state in the Bill the rights to compensation which private individuals who take direct action in the courts at present have under the 1936 Act procedures. However, as a result of my noble friend's amendment magistrates' courts proceedings under Clause 79 become criminal in character and hence it is no longer necessary to provide for a right of appeal to the Crown Court. The provision which Amendment No. 6 made is, therefore, no longer required and if the amendment were to remain in the Bill, the Bill would be technically deficient.

Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 6 to which the Commons have disagreed for the reason numbered 6A.—(Baroness Blotch.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.