Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Wallace of Tankerness (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 February 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].

Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

I am trying to find what part of the amendment the Minister finds objectionable or would cut off the right of appeal. Is he saying that the Scottish Government have assented to a body, perhaps an oil company, wishing to challenge a provision relating to the marine plan for the Scottish offshore region doing so in the High Court in London as opposed to the Court of Session in Edinburgh? Does he not think that it is logical that if a matter relates to an area in Scottish jurisdiction for other purposes, it should fall to a court of the Scottish jurisdiction, not the High Court, and vice versa?

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c37 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Applications Conservation Coal Coastal areas Archaeology Devolution Cultural heritage Biodiversity Fisheries Licensing Electricity generation Infrastructure Legislative competence English Heritage Local government Northern Ireland Oil Planning Natural gas Public consultation National Assembly for Wales Property Non-departmental public bodies Scotland Sustainable development Wales Scottish Parliament Renewable energy Shipping Wave power Seas and oceans Wrecks Testing Non-governmental organisations Department for Culture, Media and Sport High Court Natural England Marine Management Organisation Infrastructure Planning Commission Marine conservation zones
Legislation
Marine and Coastal Access Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk