My Lords, as with proceedings under the tribunal’s other two functions, appeals and reviews, we propose that in general each party should bear its own costs. The amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, would give the tribunal an extra power to order the Attorney-General or the commission, as the case may be, to pay the other party’s costs. However, we do not think that that is necessary or desirable. Proceedings on references to the tribunal would generally not be adversarial since in essence the purpose would be to help to clarify the law where the commission has not yet made a decision. An affected person or charity wanting to have their own view of the law taken into account by the tribunal may join himself as a party and will be able to ensure that his view is put across to the tribunal. By choosing that route, the person or charity will not need to pay his own costs if he decides to do that. But he need not join himself as a party since either the Attorney-General or the commission represented, will not incur any costs in the proceedings, but will still have their view taken into consideration.
We do not think that this provision is necessary because it is covered. Simply to force an extra power on the Attorney-General, which would be the effect of the amendment, would not be a desirable end in itself.
Charities Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Charities Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c389-90 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 14:00:36 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265728
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265728
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265728