UK Parliament / Open data

Children and Families Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Elystan-Morgan (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 December 2013. It occurred during Debate on bills on Children and Families Bill.

I certainly had not intended to take part in this debate, which has been at a very exalted level. However, the speech from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope, reminded me of another point that has not been touched upon. If one reads the amendment as it is worded, one has the impression that the test should very probably be on the balance of probability. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope, referred to the judgment by Lord Nicholls in Re H 18 years ago. The judgment as I remember it, and

correct me if I am wrong, was to this effect: normally the test will be on a balance of probability—less or more likely. However—I believe that these were his words—the more serious the accusation, the more cogent must be the evidence to establish that accusation. If I am right about that, and I believe that I am, it means that this amendment would undermine that principle in Re H completely.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

750 c1175 

Session

2013-14

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber

Subjects

Back to top