COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 28 July 1981)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I propose, with the leave of the House, to group together Amendments Nos. 3, 4 and 5 and 20, 21 and 22. I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 3.
This group of amendments, which I think I should explain in a little more detail, is designed to restore the provisions of the Bill relating to rights of action in rem in admiralty cases to the same position as at present under the Administration of Justice Act 1956, but with a change in relation to ships which are the subject of a charter by demise. On Report in your Lordships' House, my noble and learned friend Lord Diplock expressed some concern at the breadth of the changes which it then made in the rules giving rights to plaintiffs to start actions in rem. I undertook to look again at the question in consultation with the interests concerned. As a result of those, I decided it would be better, with one minor exception, not to proceed with these changes for the time being, and accordingly these amendments were moved by the Government in another place to restore the status quo, with the exception that charterers by demise are placed on the same footing as owners for the purposes of the commencement of actions in rem. Those who have been consulted, I understand, agree that this is a small but useful improvement.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, those who are dealing with these matters were, with respect, well advised to accept the advice of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock, who is probably the finest world authority on charter parties and kindred matters, and I would certainly not quarrel with him, or indeed with the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor.

§ The Lord Chancellor
I hope none of us will quarrel with each other this afternoon, my Lords.