Proceeding contribution from Lord Lyell of Markyate (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 19 July 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Fraud Bill [HL].
Fraud Bill [HL]
I rise briefly to support what my noble friend Lord Kingsland has said. Recklessness is a very good test when criminality is in issue. Recklessness is well understood by the courts. It means not only what my noble friend has quoted from cases, but also, in a sense, a deliberate closing of the eyes to something that is important. It is a much safer basis on which to convict somebody for fraud than the fact that the person making the representation knew that what he was saying might be misleading, which is a fairly light test. When one is dealing with the criminal law, it is much better to have a clear test. I ask the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General to think carefully about this amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 673 c1416-7
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Contracts Data protection Abuse Crime Conspiracy Common law Fraud Exemptions Powers Misrepresentation Married people Sales Reform Caveat emptor rule
- Legislation
- Fraud Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:31:51 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_263098
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_263098
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_263098