COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 22 July 1991)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 56. I have already spoken to this, but my noble friend Lady Elles wished to raise a point on it so I have taken it separately.

§ Baroness Elles
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for giving me the opportunity to comment on Amendments Nos. 56 to 58. As I understand it from the explanation in Notes on Commons Amendments the effect would be to, prevent potential parties to an appeal who have not taken any part in the appeal to either the child support appeal tribunal or to the child support commissioner being able to apply for leave to appeal". That appears to represent a significant change from the previous position. I should be grateful if my noble and learned friend could expand further on that point.
It may be that by this time of the day one becomes a little dyslexic, but Amendment No. 56 reads: Page 16, line 1, leave out from 'who' to 'was' in line 5". I do not understand how that would operate. Who would be deprived of the right of appeal by that change? Such a right appeared in the Bill previously but has now been deleted. I should be grateful to my noble and learned friend for an explanation.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, the purpose of Amendments Nos. 56, 57 and 58 is to modify Clause 23. People who have not taken part at the earlier stage could have immediate access to the court. If they were entitled to take part at an earlier stage but chose not to do o it would be wrong for them to have immediate access to the courts. Their right of appeal would of course be protected as they would still be able to exercise their rights to request a review or to appeal, as appropriate, by taking an interest in the matter earlier.
As the matter was originally expressed it looked as though one could stand aside from the whole procedure until it reached the courts at the highest level and one could then become involved. That does not seem to us to be appropriate, and the purpose of Amendments Nos. 56, 57 and 58—and I think that they achieve the purpose—is to restrict the appeal rights to those who have been involved in the earlier stage.

§ Baroness Elles
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for that explanation which clarifies the point.