I note my hon. Friend’s comments. My noble Friend Baroness Ashton has worked hard in the House of Lords to try to reconcile those interests. We owe a debt of gratitude to Lord Janner, who has also worked hard on the matter. I had hoped that we were there, but doubtless the issue will arise again in Committee.
The immunity will provide protection only from seizure. It will not protect museums in the UK or lenders from being subject to a claim in conversion. The specific restitution of a work of art being claimed is only one of the remedies that the court can award. It can also award damages. The lawyers present will know that that means that all that is being protected is the picture, not its value. The immunity will be given only to museums and galleries approved by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, or, for institutions in Wales or Scotland, Welsh or Scottish Ministers.
We have listened to concerns expressed in the other place and added an extra safeguard to the Bill in clause 131, which lists the factors that must be considered before a museum or gallery can be approved. In particular, to be approved for receiving immunity, institutions will have to satisfy the relevant Minister that their procedures for checking the provenance of an item that they intend to borrow are satisfactory and comply with Department for Culture, Media and Sport guidance on due diligence. If museums do not maintain high standards of due diligence, especially if they do not follow the guidelines, they risk the withdrawal of that approval—and the protection given by the provisions.
Museums and galleries will have to publish specified information about objects that they intend to borrow, in advance of bringing them to the UK. That will enable anyone to raise questions about an object’s provenance before it arrives. When a query is raised, the institution will need to examine the evidence carefully before taking a final decision on whether to borrow the object.
Parts 7 and 8 deal with miscellaneous provisions, including measures to allow the High Court in judicial review proceedings to substitute its decision for that of a court or tribunal when the original decision is quashed on the ground that there has been an error in law. Part 8 contains general stuff, including extent and commencement.
The proposed reforms will have a profound effect on the lives of many people. The Bill will improve access to justice—
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Vera Baird
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 5 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
457 c1311-2 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:57:39 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_381880
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_381880
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_381880