Proceeding contribution from Nick Palmer (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 2 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill.
Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill
Most of us are not legal experts, unlike my hon. Friend. Even so, we have been able to identify many ambiguities and problems in the Bill. In the current state of affairs, the position is intuitively clear when a case comes to court. Would it therefore not be a retrograde step to create a haze of legal ambiguities? The ensuing lawyers festival would make today’s debate look like peanuts.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c555
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crimes against the person Crimes of violence Criminal law Buildings Burglary Criminal liability Firearms Protection Police Prosecutions Property Victims Trespass Self-defence
- Legislation
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:18:53 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283209
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283209
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283209