HC Deb 15 November 1937 vol 329 cc27-8
48. Mr. Liddall

asked the Attorney-General whether, having regard to the increase in the number of the unsavoury type of breach of promise cases, and to recent pronouncements by judges, and that it is not in the public interest that any action should lie for breach of promise alone, he will introduce some measure of reform of the breach of promise law, in order that in future the onus will be placed on the complainant of proving not only that a breach has occurred, but that it has inflicted specific damage other than mere disappointment of expectations or loss of affection?

The Attorney-General

I am unaware that there has been a marked increase in the type of case to which the hon. Member refers. With regard to the second part of his question, I can only refer him to the answer which I gave him upon this subject on 18th May last year.

Mr. Liddall

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that since the early seventies all classes of people in this country have appreciated how unjust the breach of promise law is; and is he further aware that in 1879—

Mr. Speaker

That question is too long and historical.

Mr. Liddall

With all respect, I submit that what I am putting as a supplementary arises out of the original answer. The point I wish to put to the Attorney-General is whether he is aware that in 1879—

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid we cannot go into that at Question Time.