HL Deb 14 October 1981 vol 424 cc398-9

118 Page 18, line 21, at end insert— (ia) the statement referred to in paragraph (a)(ii) above discloses a prima facie breach of interdict by the non-applicant spouse.'.

119 Page 18, line 23, leave out 'in respect of those facts and circumstances'.

120 Page 18, line 30, leave out 'sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii) of'.

121 Page 18, line 31, leave out 'do' and insert 'does'.

The Earl of Mansfield

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 118, 119, 120 and 121 en bloc. These amendments provide that among the factors on which the sheriff must be satisfied before he orders the further detention of the arrested spouse is that a prima facie case for breach of interdict exists. This will avoid a person being detained in custody where there could be no prospect of success in a subsequent action for breach of interdict. It involves the sheriff in considering the nature of the breach of interdict for which the spouse was arrested as well as the risk of further violence. It provides an enhanced safeguard against the unreasonable encroachment of an individual's liberty.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said amendments.—(The Earl of Mansfield.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.