HL Deb 22 July 1988 vol 499 c1616

124 Clause 72, page 49, line 32, after 'that', insert 'there are reasonable grounds for thinking that'.

125 Clause 73, page 50, line 13, at end insert—

'(1A) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) above, a restraint order may make such provision as the court thinks fit for living expenses and legal expenses'.

Earl Ferrers

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 124 and 125 en bloc.

The purpose of' these amendments is to improve the safeguards for suspects whose assets may be restrained by an order of the High Court pending their trial. The first amendment would require the High Court to be satisfied before freezing any assets that there are reasonable grounds for thinking that a confiscation order might be made at the end of the proceedings. The new concept here is that of "reasonable grounds".

The second amendment makes clear on the face of the Bill that the court can allow a person whose assets are frozen to draw out sufficient money to cover his reasonable living and legal expenses. These are important additional safeguards.

Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 124 and 125.—(Earl Ferrers.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.