CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH LESS FAVOURABLE TREATMENT IS JUSTIFIED (Hansard, 28 March 1995)

§ Madam Deputy Speaker
With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendment No. 85.

§ Mr. Wigley
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I should be grateful if the Minister would explain the precise implications of amendment No. 81.

§ Mr. Hague
I agreed in Committee to consider paragraph (ii) in the light of the Law Commission's recent report on incapacity and to reconsider the situation. The amendment will mean that a service provider will still be allowed to discriminate justifiably against someone if it is not able to contract, but only if it is reasonable to do so within the circumstances of the case.
Let me illustrate that further. There are some circumstances in which a service provider is very unlikely reasonably to think that a person does not have the ability to contract and does not understand the principles behind a particular transaction—for example, when someone is buying a newspaper or a Mars bar from a corner shop. The circumstances are different when someone enters a car showroom and attempts to buy an expensive luxury car. In such a case, when there is a major purchase or credit sale involved, if the service provider has justifiable reasons to think that the disabled customer is incapable of entering into an enforceable agreement or giving an informed consent, he will be entitled not to provide the goods or services. We debated this matter in Committee and I made the case for it in general terms.
The situation, therefore, turns on the individual facts of each case. The amendment deals with that point and would remove the possibility of unscrupulous service providers exploiting this paragraph of the clause as a loophole. A provider will not be able to say that because someone could not enter into an enforceable agreement to buy an expensive car he will not sell that person a newspaper either. It will depend on the particular circumstances. I hope that the amendment will be warmly welcomed.