Investigatory Powers Bill — Major News Publishers Which Are Not Members of an Approved Regulator — Claims of Unlawful Interception — Court Costs — 1 Nov 2016 at 15:45
John Penrose MP, Weston-Super-Mare voted against requiring certain major news publishers, which are not members of an approved regulator, to pay the costs of any court cases in relation to claims of unlawful interception.
The majority of MPs voted against requiring certain major news publishers, which are not members of an approved regulator, to pay the costs of any court cases in relation to claims of unlawful interception.
The rejected proposal would have given courts the freedom to make alternative, or no, awards of costs if it was judged just and equitable in all the circumstances to do so.
The rejected proposal would also have generally protected publishers which are members of an approved regulator from costs in such cases.
The rejected proposals would have provided an incentive for publishers to become members of an approved regulator.
MPs were considering the Investigatory Powers Bill.
The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 15.
Lords amendment 15 sought to add a new clause titled Interception without lawful authority: award of costs stating:
- (1) This section applies where—
- (a) a claim is made under section 8 (civil liability for certain unlawful interceptions) against a person (“the defendant”),
- (b) the defendant was a relevant publisher at the material time, and
- (c) the claim is related to the publication of news-related material.
- (2) If the defendant was a member of an approved regulator at the time when the claim was commenced (or was unable to be a member at that time for reasons beyond the defendant’s control or it would have been unreasonable in the circumstances for the defendant to have been a member at that time), the court must not award costs against the defendant unless satisfied that—
- (a) the issues raised by the claim could not have been resolved by using an arbitration scheme of the approved regulator, or
- (b) it is just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case to award costs against the defendant.
- (3) If the defendant was not a member of an approved regulator at the time when the claim was commenced (but would have been able to be a member at that time and it would have been reasonable in the circumstances for the defendant to have been a member at that time), the court must award costs against the defendant unless satisfied that—
- (a) the issues raised by the claim could not have been resolved by using an arbitration scheme of the approved regulator (had the defendant been a member), or
- (b) it is just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case to make a different award of costs or make no award of costs.
- (4) This section is not to be read as limiting any power to make rules of court.
- (5) This section does not apply until such time as a body is first recognised as an approved regulator.
- (6) Subsections (2) and (3) shall apply to any claim issued after this section comes into force.
- (7) For the purposes of this section “approved regulator” shall have the same meaning as in section 42 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, and “relevant publisher” shall have the same meaning as in section 41 of that Act.”
An approved regulator is defined as a regulator recognised under the provisions set out by the "Royal Charter on Self Regulation of the Press". Relevant publishers are news publishers those with over ten staff and turning over more than £2m per year, with exceptions including broadcasters, scientific publishers, charities and public bodies.
- Crime and Courts Bill — New Clause 21A — Press Regulation — Exemplary Damages — 18 Mar 2013 at 22:21
-  Parliament's webpage on the Investigatory Powers Bill
-  Lords amendments to the Investigatory Powers Bill - 31 October 2016
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.
|Party||Majority (Aye)||Minority (No)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||290 (+2 tell)||1||0||89.1%|
|Lab||0||194 (+2 tell)||0||84.5%|
|Crispin Blunt||Reigate||Con (front bench)||no|