Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill — New Clause 5 — Restrictions on Time Limits: Actions Brought Against the Crown by Service Personnel — 3 Nov 2020 at 18:00

The majority of MPs voted not to exclude legal actions against the United Kingdom brought by serving or former members of the armed services from proposed, more restrictive, time limits on actions in respect of personal injuries, death or human rights claims which relate to overseas operations of the armed forces.

MPs were considering the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill. [1][2]

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Restrictions on Time Limits: Actions Brought Against the Crown by Service Personnel and stated:

The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:

  • "This new clause amends Part 2 of the Bill so that it explicitly excludes actions brought against the Crown by serving or former service personnel from the limitations on courts’ discretion that the Part imposes in respect of actions relating to overseas operations."

Only the explanatory statement appears to indicate which part of the Bill the new clause was intended to be inserted into.

Part 2 of the Bill, with Schedule 2 amends the rules governing the court’s discretion to disapply the three-year time limit for bringing claims for personal injuries and deaths and provides that the limitation period cannot be extended beyond six years.

Notably it appears the rejected new clause may not have applied to the Scottish courts which were dealt with via Part 3 of the Bill.

The motion rejected by the majority of MPs in this vote was:

  • That the clause be added to the Bill.


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

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 (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con335 (+2 tell) 2093.1%
DUP0 80100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 3080.0%
Lab0 188 (+2 tell)095.0%
LDem0 110100.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 46097.9%
Total:336 265094.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by constituency

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

David DavisHaltemprice and HowdenConaye
Anne Marie MorrisNewton AbbotCon (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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive