Defamation Bill — Commons Reasons — 23 Apr 2013 at 17:00

Lord Shipley voted with the majority (Not-Content).

Lords Amendment 1: After Clause 1 insert the following new Clause-

"Arbitration Service for defamation and related civil claims against members of Independent Regulatory Board

(1) The Lord Chief Justice shall establish a Defamation Recognition Commission.

(2) Schedule (Recognition Commission) makes provision relating to the Defamation Recognition Commission.

(3) The Defamation Recognition Commission shall certify bodies as Independent Regulatory Boards in accordance with the criteria in Schedule (Recognition Commission).

(4) An Independent Regulatory Board shall provide a recognised arbitration service as set out in Schedule (Specialist Arbitration Service).

(5) A court shall take into account when awarding costs and damages whether either party, claimant or defendant in a dispute has chosen not to use the recognised arbitration service of an Independent Regulatory Board.

(6) A court shall award costs under subsection (5) on an indemnity basis unless the interests of justice require otherwise.

(7) A court may order a successful party to pay all the costs of proceedings if such party has unreasonably refused to use an available recognised arbitration service.

(8) A court awarding in its judgment exemplary damages where a defendant is guilty of a flagrant breach of a defendant's rights can also take into account whether-

(a) a claimant refused to use a recognised arbitration service;

(b) a defendant refused to use or join a recognised arbitration service."

Commons disagreement and reason

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 1, 15 and 16 for the Reason set out at 16A.

15: After Clause 17 insert the following new Schedule-

"Schedule

Recognition Commission

1 This Schedule provides the method by which the Recognition Commission may be constituted for the purposes of this Act.

2 Appointments to membership of the Recognition Commission will be made by the Lord Chief Justice.

3 An individual may be appointed only if he or she has consented to act and is-

(a) a present or former Civil Service Commissioner;

(b) a present or former holder of high judicial office (within the meaning of Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005); or

(c) a person who in the opinion of the Lord Chief Justice is suitable for appointment having regard to their reputation and experience and is independent of all political parties and all media organisations.

4 The Recognition Commission must consider whether an Independent Regulatory Board body has-

(a) sufficient guarantees of independence, including suitable independent, fair and transparent procedures for appointments and funding,

(b) suitable functions, powers, personnel and resources to ensure that it can fulfil its principal objectives effectively,

(c) an appropriate standards code,

(d) an arbitration service able to deal with defamation and related civil claims, effective processes for upholding standards,

(e) an efficient procedure for handling complaints, and

(f) is open to all news publishers.

5 The Recognition Commission must review a recognised regulator at least once during the period of two years beginning with the date of certification, and at intervals of not more than three years after that.

6 If having reviewed a body the Recognition Commission is no longer satisfied that it complies with paragraph 4, the Recognition Commission must consult the body and give directions designed to ensure that the body complies with paragraph 4 within a reasonable time.

7 If the body fails to comply with directions given under paragraph 6 the Recognition Commission must revoke the body's certification.

8 The Recognition Commission shall not be involved in the regulation of any subscriber to an Independent Regulatory Board."

Commons disagreement and reason

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 1, 15 and 16 for the Reason set out at 16A.

16: Insert the following new Schedule-

"Schedule

Specialist Arbitration Service

1 An Independent Regulatory Board must provide an Arbitration Service in relation to defamation and related civil legal claims drawing on independent legal experts on a cost-only basis to the subscribing member.

2 The arbitration rules must provide for a fair, quick and inexpensive process, which is inquisitorial and free for complainants to use (save for a power to make an adverse order for the costs of the arbitrator if proceedings are frivolous or vexatious).

3 The arbitrator shall have the powers set out in section 48(3) to (5) of the Arbitration Act 1996.

4 The arbitrator must be able to hold hearings where necessary or dispense with them where not necessary.

5 The process must include provision for frivolous or vexatious claims to be struck out at an early stage."

Commons disagreement and reason

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 1, 15 and 16 for the following Reason-

16A: Because the draft Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press and provisions in the Crime and Courts Bill and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill will be sufficient to implement the recommendations in Lord Justice Leveson's report.

Motion A

Moved by Lord McNally:

That this House do not insist on its Amendments 1, 15 and 16, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 16A.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Not-Content)Minority (Content)Turnout
Con155 (+1 tell) 071.6%
Crossbench38 2432.5%
DUP1 025.0%
Judge1 114.3%
Lab0 159 (+2 tell)71.9%
LDem73 (+1 tell) 180.6%
Non-affiliated1 03.4%
Other0 133.3%
PC0 150.0%
UUP2 066.7%
Total:271 18759.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Lord Aberdare Crossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Afshar Crossbenchaye
Viscount Allenby of MegiddoCrossbenchaye
Lord Alton of LiverpoolCrossbenchaye
Lord Bichard Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Blair of BoughtonCrossbenchaye
The Earl of ClancartyCrossbenchaye
Viscount Colville of CulrossCrossbenchaye
Baroness Coussins Crossbenchaye
Lord Elystan-Morgan Crossbench (front bench)aye
The Earl of ErrollCrossbenchaye
Baroness Finlay of LlandaffCrossbenchaye
Lord Hannay of ChiswickCrossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Hayman Crossbenchaye
Baroness Howarth of BrecklandCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Joffe Crossbenchaye
The Earl of ListowelCrossbenchaye
Lord Low of DalstonCrossbenchaye
The Countess of MarCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Martin of SpringburnCrossbenchaye
Baroness Masham of IltonCrossbenchaye
Baroness Meacher Crossbenchaye
Baroness Morgan of DrefelinCrossbenchaye
Lord Pannick Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Patel of BradfordCrossbenchaye
Lord Robertson of Port EllenCrossbenchaye
Baroness Stern Crossbench (front bench)aye
Viscount Falkland LDemaye
Lord Willis of KnaresboroughLDem (front bench)aye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive