HL Deb 21 October 1980 vol 413 c1872

112 Schedule 2, page 57, line 38, after 'may' insert', subject to subsection (4) below,'

113 Schedule 2, page 58, line 14, after 'may' insert ', subject to subsection (4) below,'

114 Schedule 2, page 58, line 23, at end insert— '(4) In relation to any appeal under section 228(1) of this Act, the High Court shall, where it appears to it that the appellant committed the act charged against him but that he was insane when he did so, dispose of the appeal by—

  1. (a) setting aside the verdict of the trial court and substituting therefor a verdict of acquittal on the ground of insanity; and
  2. (b) quashing any sentence imposed on the appellant as respects the indictment and ordering that he be detained in a state hospital or such other hospital as for special reasons the court may specify.

(5) The provisions of subsection (4) of section 174 of this Act shall apply to an order under subsection (4)(b) above as they apply to an order under that section.'.

Lord MACKAY of CLASHFERN

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 112 to 114. The aim of this amendment is to include in the solemn appeal provisions an existing power of the High Court which has been omitted from Schedule 2. The new Section 254(1)(b) gives the High Court the power to substitute an amended verdict of guilty, but it does not include the existing power of the High Court to substitute a verdict of acquittal on the grounds of insanity where the court is satisfied that the appellant committed the act but was insane at the time. The power is rarely used but is not without importance or usefulness, and should in our view be retained. I beg to move.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendments.—(Lord Mackay of Clashfern.)