header-logo header-logo

18 January 2022
Issue: 7963 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law , Criminal
printer mail-detail

The Lords make their views count

The House of Lords rejected the Government’s controversial amendments dealing with extreme climate protest on Monday, the sixth and last day of the Report stage of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

The clauses cannot be resurrected when the Bill returns to the Commons because they were not included in the Bill when it went to the Lords. To make these provisions law would require a new Bill.

The Lords rejected: the new offence of “locking on” (216 votes to 163); the new offence of obstructing major transport works (208 votes to 154); the new offence of interference with the use or operation of key national infrastructure (198 votes to 153); new powers to stop and search in connection with protest affecting key national infrastructure both with suspicion (205 votes to 141) and without suspicion  (212 votes to 128); and the introduction of Serious Disruption Prevention Orders (199 votes to 124).

The Lords agreed that the maximum penalty for wilful obstruction of the highway should be increased to include 6 months imprisonment, but limited the penalty to obstruction of the 4,300 mile Strategic Road Network. (216 votes to 160) They voted (by 242 to 185) to make misogyny a hate crime by giving the courts the power to make it an aggravating factor in any crime and increase the sentence accordingly.

The amendment was moved by Baroness Newlove (Conservative), former Victims Commissioner. They also approved (by 144 votes to 101) an amendment moved by Lord Best (crossbencher) to repeal the Vagrancy Act 1824 which makes it a crime to beg and to sleep rough.

The House adjourned this final session on this stage of the Bill at 12.45am.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll