---

Legal Services Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 56: 56: After Clause 34 , insert the following new Clause— ““Appeal against public censure (1) An approved regulator in respect of whom the Board decides to publish a statement under section 34 may appeal to the court on one or more of the appeal grounds. (2) The appeal grounds are— (a) that the decision was not within the power of the Board under section 34; (b) that any of the requirements of section 35 have not been complied with in relation to the imposition of the penalty and the interests of the approved regulator have been substantially prejudiced by the non-compliance; (c) that in all circumstances, the publication of a statement under section 34 is, or the terms of the statement published or to be published are (or would be), manifestly unreasonable or manifestly inappropriate; (d) that the decision is unlawful on any ground that would give rise to a claim for judicial review. (3) An appeal under subsection (1) must be made within the period of 42 days beginning with the day on which the notice under section 35(4A) was given to the approved regulator. (4) Where an appeal is made before expiry of the 7-day period mentioned in section 35(4A), the Board must not (unless the court otherwise orders) publish the statement until the appeal has been withdrawn or dismissed. (5) On an appeal under subsection (1), where the court considers it appropriate to do so in all the circumstances of the case and is satisfied of one or more of the appeal grounds, the court may— (a) quash the decision to publish a statement, or (b) vary the terms of the statement (and, where the statement has been published, direct the Board to publish to the same extent the statement as varied). (6) In this section ““the court”” means the High Court.”” The noble Lord said: In moving the amendment, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 57 in the same group. These amendments allow for an approved regulator to have a right of appeal against public censure under Clause 34. Your Lordships may recall that, at Second Reading, the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor recognised that the powers of intervention against the approved regulators by the Legal Services Board were significant, but he believed that the board needed to have as effective a range of powers against the approved regulators as possible. He accepted, however, that there needed to be safeguards in the exercise of those powers, but claimed that the Bill provided for them. In evidence to the Joint Committee, several witnesses complained about the limited rights of statutory appeal against regulatory decisions by the board. In contrast, the Government considered that the rights were adequate. It is especially striking to the Opposition that the Bill provides no opportunity for an approved regulator to appeal against public censure by the Legal Services Board under Clause 34. It is that lacuna that Amendment No. 56 seeks to address. It is plain to us that the safeguards under the Bill—notification and consultation—provide insufficient protection and, therefore, we seek to incorporate a new clause that will provide an approved regulator with a right of appeal to the High Court against censure. Amendment No. 57 ensures that that new appeal mechanism will operate effectively by providing a short suspensory period between notification of the final terms in which a statement censuring an approved regulator is to be published and actual publication. That will give time for the approved regulator to launch an appeal before the board’s censure is made public. The Government surely could not argue that seven days was an unreasonable period. I beg to move.