HL Deb 16 July 1981 vol 422 cc1438-9

[References are to Bill [138] as first printed for the Commons]

1 Clause 10, page 6, line 4, leave out from ("omission") to ("the") in line 11 and insert ("intended to be induced is to a person's prejudice if, and only if, it is one which, if it occurs—

  1. (a) will result—
    1. (i) in his temporary or permanent loss of property; or
    2. (ii) in his being deprived of an opportunity to earn remuneration or greater remuneration; or
    3. (iii) in his being deprived of an opportunity to gain a financial advantage otherwise than by way of remuneration; or
  2. (b) will result in somebody being given an opportunity—
    1. (i) to earn remuneration or greater remuneration from him; or
    2. (ii) to gain a financial advantage from him otherwise than by way of remuneration; or
  3. (c) will be").

Viscount Colville of Culross

My Lords, I beg to move that the House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1.

First, may I say to my noble and learned friend, and the noble Lords, Lord Boston and Lord Foot, that I had not expected those words and I am immensely grateful to them. I am sure that my honourable and learned friend the Member for Blackpool, North, will be equally grateful because he took a lot of trouble about it. I am a cautious person and I have still to pilot seven amendments that have come from another place before this measure can finally be put upon the statute book. I hope that we shall have no great difficulty before I finally row the boat and moor her to the quay and complete the task and voyage that we set about.

The first amendment is a technical matter but one of some importance. The whole of the first part of the Bill, which deals with forgery, is geared to the proposition in Clause 1 which relates to doing something to the prejudice of some other person or to oneself. Clause 10 set about to define, among other things, the meaning of "prejudice". This Bill was not only very carefully considered in this House but in another place, and the right honourable and learned gentleman, the Member for Dulwich, had a particularly acute look at Clause 10 and the meaning of "prejudice". On the discussion in another place, it became apparent that the definition was not sufficiently wide to cover circumstances in which a person could be prejudiced by being deprived of an opportunity to gain financial advantage or earn remuneration, and also it did not cover circumstances in which a person obtains an opportunity to gain a financial advantage from another thus prejudicing another person; gaining a financial advantage from person A to the prejudice of person B.

It was thought—I am sure rightly—that circumstances of this sort needed to be catered for. The classic example was quoted of a person who resorts to forgery in order to obtain a contract for which he and others had been bidding by forging testimonials or something of that sort, and thereby depriving the genuine tenderer of what would have been his contract if it had not been for the forgery. Although the first amendment looks very complicated, it makes the definition of "prejudice" more comprehensive so that it will deal with the type of case that was being discussed in another place. I hope that in view of the fact that it was accepted there your Lordships will also think it is right that we should agree with that House.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendment.—(Viscount Colville of Culross.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.