moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 1, Amendment No. 4:
4: After Clause 1, leave out lines 281 to 295
The noble Baroness said: The amendment probes the potential powers of the magistrates’ court. I appreciate that powers are not yet extended to the magistrates’ courts, but would still like to ask some questions about how this would be implemented. I refer particularly to Schedule 5 to the Family Law Act 1996, which allows the High Court or a county court to remand a person under proposed new Section 63K. A magistrates’ court would be unable to carry out such powers under Part 4 without amendment to the Magistrates’ Courts Act. If and when jurisdiction is extended to magistrates’ courts under proposed new Section 69N, will the magistrates’ courts have the same powers as the High Court or the country court—that is, jurisdiction to deal with contempt of court in respect of a breach of a relevant order with imprisonment of up to two years?
Should there be provision for summary offences in England and Wales? I suspect that this may not be necessary, because the High Court and the county court have wide powers to deal adequately with a breach of order, but I look forward to the Minister’s response. I beg to move.
Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Verma
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 10 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c270GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:49:52 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396139
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396139
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396139