Criminal Justice and Courts Bill — Clauses 65 and 66 — Judicial Review Application — Requirement to Provide Financial Information — 13 Jan 2015 at 18:34

Julian Huppert MP, Cambridge voted to require information on the source of financial support for a judicial review application be provided to a court.

The majority of MPs voted to require information on the source of financial support for a judicial review application be provided to a court.

MPs were considering the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill[1].

The motion supported by the majority of MPs taking part in this vote was:

  • That this House insists on its disagreement to Lords amendments 103, 104, 105 and 106, and proposes its amendments (a) and (b) in lieu.

The Lords amendments stated[2]

  • 103 Page 66, line 10, after “paragraph” insert “or, notwithstanding a failure to do so, the court in its discretion considers that it is nevertheless appropriate to grant the applicant leave to make the application for judicial review”
  • 104 Page 66, line 32, after “paragraph” insert “or, notwithstanding a failure to do so, the tribunal in its discretion considers that it is nevertheless appropriate to grant the applicant permission or leave to apply for relief” Clause 66
  • 105 Page 67, line 1, leave out “must” and insert “may”
  • 106 Page 67, line 7, leave out “must” and insert “may”

The Commons amendments in lieu[3]

  • Page 66, line 21, at end insert—
  • “(3AA) Rules of court under subsection (3)(b) that specify information identifying those who are, or are likely to be, sources of financial support must provide that only a person whose financial support (whether direct or indirect) exceeds, or is likely to exceed, a level set out in the rules has to be identified. This subsection does not apply to rules that specify information described in subsection (3A)(b).””
  • Page 66, line 43, at end insert—
  • “(3AA) Tribunal Procedure Rules under subsection (3)(b) that specify information identifying those who are, or are likely to be, sources of financial support must provide that only a person whose financial support (whether direct or indirect ) exceeds, or is likely to exceed, a level set out in the rules has to be identified. This subsection does not apply to rules that specify information described in subsection (3A)(b).””

During the debate leading up to the vote Chris Grayling MP[5] explained the rationale for the Commons amendments requiring the source of an applicant's financial support be provided:

  • It is to ensure that there is less chance for those who fund and control a judicial review to escape their proper measure of costs liability,

==

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 are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

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

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con253 (+1 tell) 2084.5%
DUP0 4050.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 10100.0%
Lab0 211 (+2 tell)082.6%
LDem46 (+1 tell) 0083.9%
PC0 30100.0%
Respect0 10100.0%
SDLP0 30100.0%
UKIP1 0050.0%
Total:301 227083.4%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs 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 MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Peter BottomleyWorthing WestCon (front bench)no
Zac GoldsmithRichmond ParkCon (front bench)no

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