Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill — Report (2nd Day) — Amendment 129 — 27 Jun 2023 at 19:45

Moved by Lord Agnew of Oulton

129: After Clause 202, insert the following new Clause-“Civil recovery: costs of proceedings After section 313 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 insert-“313A Costs orders(1) This section applies to proceedings brought by an enforcement authority under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 where the property in respect of which the proceedings have been brought has been obtained through economic crime.(2) The court may not make an order that any costs of proceedings relating to a case to which this section applies (including appeal proceedings) are payable by an enforcement authority to a respondent or a specified responsible officer in respect of the involvement of the respondent or the officer in those proceedings, unless-(a) the authority acted unreasonably in making or opposing the application to which the proceedings relate, or in supporting or opposing the making of the order to which the proceedings relate,(b) the authority acted dishonestly or improperly in the course of the proceedings, or(c) it would not be in the interests of justice.””Member’s explanatory statementThis extends the cost cap for civil recovery cases beyond Unexplained Wealth Orders. Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act permits the recovery of criminal assets where no conviction has been possible. For example, because the individuals avoided conviction by remaining remote from the commission of the crimes but were beneficiaries of them, or having fled the country. It retains safeguards on costs for improper action taken by prosecuting authorities.

Ayes 164, Noes 150.

Debate in Parliament |

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 (Content)Minority (Not-Content)Turnout
Bishop3 012.0%
Con4 138 (+2 tell)52.2%
Crossbench11 59.0%
Green1 050.0%
Lab83 (+2 tell) 047.2%
LDem50 060.2%
Non-affiliated8 319.6%
PC1 0100.0%
Total:161 14638.9%

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

Lord Agnew of OultonCon (front bench)aye
Baroness Altmann Conaye
Lord Garnier Con (front bench)aye
Lord Leigh of HurleyCon (front bench)aye
Viscount Brookeborough Crossbenchno
Lord Carrington Crossbench (front bench)no
Viscount Craigavon Crossbenchno
Lord Greenway Crossbenchno
Viscount Waverley Crossbenchno
Lord Gadhia Non-affiliatedno
Baroness Hoey Non-affiliatedno
Baroness Stowell of BeestonNon-affiliated (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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive