Search Results

1-15 of 15 results for subject:Injunctions

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Davies of Oldham, Lord

Answered by

Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)

Type

Oral answers to questions

Date

3 December 2003

Reference

655 c309

House

House of Lords

Davies of Oldham, Lord

1st supplementary on seeking a High Court injunction to stop the proposed strikes.

Asked by

Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat)

Oral questions - 1st Supplementary

Status

Answered

Date

3 December 2003

Reference

655 c309

House

House of Lords

Davies of Oldham, Lord

What action they propose to take in the light of threatened industrial action on the London Underground.

Asked by

Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat)

Oral questions - Lead

Status

Answered

Date

3 December 2003

Reference

655 c309

House

House of Lords

Davies of Oldham, Lord

Answered by

Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)

Type

Oral answers to questions

Date

3 December 2003

Reference

655 c309

House

House of Lords

Solicitor-General

To ask the Solicitor General, what guidance the Attorney General has issued to judges in respect of the appropriateness of agreeing to injunctions to prevent a potential libel.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

13 November 2003

Reference

138582; 413 c397W

House

House of Commons

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what the Government's policy is on whether the United States vessels now en route to Hartlepool should continue their voyage; what action she plans to take to manage the environmental risk posed by former United States naval vessels...

Asked by

David Lidington (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

4 November 2003

For answer on

13 November 2003

Answered on

13 November 2003

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the Government's policy is on whether the United States vessels now en route to Hartlepool should continue their voyage; [137142] (2) what action she plans to take to manage the environmental risk posed by former United States naval vessels in British waters pending the resolution of the court proceedings due in December; [137700] (3) assessment she has made of the implications for the work of (a) her Department and (b) the Environment Agency of the injunction obtained against Able UK by Friends of the Earth on 5 November; [137702] (4) what representations the Government has made to the United States Marine Administration to secure the return of United States former naval vessels to the United States. [137701] Mr. Morley :[holding answer 10 November 2003]: Following discussions on Friday 7 November, between my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and Secretary Mineta of the US Department of Transportation, it has been decided that for safety reasons, the first two ships currently on the way to the UK will continue to Hartlepool for safe storage, pending return to the US. This decision was taken after consideration by the Environment Agency and Government Departments of alternative storage sites. No other site is able to take the ships safely at short notice. The US authorities have been told that the proposed shipment of these vessels to Hartlepool for dismantling cannot be completed consistent with international rules and Community law. In this situation the law requires the ships to be returned to the United States. However, the immediate return to the United States of the first two ships, which are now approaching the Channel, would be impracticable, not least because of concerns about the weather. When the ships arrive at Hartlepool, the Environment Agency will place requirements on them to ensure the environment is fully protected and that the ships remain ready for return to the USA. No work is permitted on the ships given the current court injunction. The UK Government and its Agencies continue to work intensively with the US authorities to examine the safety and liability concerns they have raised to proposals that the second pair of ships, currently in transit to the UK, return to the US, and are looking for rapid resolution of that question.

Date

13 November 2003

Reference

413 c407-8W; 137142;137700;137702;137701

House

House of Commons

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps his Department will take to encourage social landlords to take more enforcement measures against anti-social tenants; and what assessment he has made of the implications for the Anti-Social Behaviour Action Plan of the awarding of costs against the...

Asked by

Baroness King of Bow (Labour)

Answering body

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

22 October 2003

For answer on

3 November 2003

Answered on

3 November 2003

Ms Oona King: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps his Department will take to encourage social landlords to take more enforcement measures against anti-social tenants; and what assessment he has made of the implications for the Anti- Social Behaviour Action Plan of the awarding of costs against the housing association in the case THCH v. Mr. Joseph Loomes. [134580] Keith Hill: I have been asked to reply. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is extending the range of tools that social landlords can use to tackle anti-social behaviour. These include broadening the range of landlords who can take out injunctions against tenants who behave in an anti-social manner, introducing a power for social landlords to demote secure and assured tenants to a less favourable form of tenancy, and generally ensuring that the responses to anti-social behaviour are appropriately focused on the needs of the community. In addition, social landlords will be required to prepare and publish policies and procedures in relation to anti-social behaviour, which will be available to tenants and other residents. It is the responsibility of social landlords to ensure that they use the appropriate enforcement measure to address the variety of anti-social behaviour cases that may arise. However, the general purpose of the measures in the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill is to encourage and facilitate social landlords taking a more active approach in their dealings with anti-social behaviour. The definition of anti-social behaviour used in Part 2 of the Anti-social Behaviour Bill refers to conduct which is capable of causing nuisance or annoyance rather than behaviour which has actually caused nuisance or annoyance to named individuals. This makes it clear that landlords can use evidence from people other than the direct victims of the behaviour in proceedings for injunctions or demotion orders. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister hopes that this will encourage more social landlords to be proactive in their management of such behaviour, for example by using professional witnesses in situations where individual victims are too scared or intimidated to give evidence. Regarding the specific case mentioned, it does not have any significant implications for the Anti-Social Behaviour Action Plan, as the judgment is specific to that case. However, the broadening of injunctive powers included within the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill mentioned earlier should make it easier for registered social landlords, including Tower Hamlets Community Homes, to undertake successful court action.

Legislation

Anti-social Behaviour Bill 2002/03

Date

3 November 2003

Reference

134580; 412 c431W;412 c439W

House

House of Commons

Fire Services Bill 2002/03

Fire Services Bill. Lords third reading and debate on amendments. Motion that bill do now pass agreed to on question. Passed and returned to the Commons with amendments.

Lead member

Lord Rooker

Answering member

Baroness Hanham

Department

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Type

Debates on bills

Date

3 November 2003

Reference

654 c638-76

House

House of Lords

Deposited Paper DEP 03/2165

Letter dated 20.10.2003 from Baroness Scotland of Asthal to Baroness Hamwee regarding the interpretation and previous application of "annoyance" in housing law in relation to the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill. HO. 2003.

Deposited by

Home Office

Type

Deposited papers

Date

29 October 2003

Reference

DEP 03/2165

House

House of Lords; House of Commons

Anti-social Behaviour Bill 2002/03

Anti-social behaviour bill. Lords report stage first day.

Department

Home Office

Type

Debates on bills

Date

23 October 2003

Reference

653 c1760-9,1780-840

House

House of Lords

Dept of Trade and Industry

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what further measures she is planning to prevent the publication of misleading advertising; and if she will list those advertisers issued with court orders in each year since 2000 to prevent the continued publication of misleading advertising. - Inc list.

Asked by

Vincent Cable (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Trade and Industry

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

12 September 2003

For answer on

18 September 2003

Answered on

18 September 2003

Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what further measures she is planning to prevent the publication of misleading advertising; and if she will list those advertisers issued with court orders in each year since 2000 to prevent the continued publication of misleading advertising. [129937] Mr. Sutcliffe: Non-broadcast advertising is controlled mainly by self-regulation under which the Advertising Standards Authority is responsible for ensuring compliance with the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing. Providing legislative backing to the Code is the Control of Misleading Advertising Regulations 1988, which empowers the Office of Fair Trading to investigate complaints about misleading advertisements, and where necessary, to seek injunctions against further publication. OFT also have powers under the Enterprise Act (previously under the Stop Now Orders (EC Directive) Regulations 2001) to take action against misleading advertising that harms the collective interests of consumers. These powers are shared by Trading Standards Services. I have no plans to introduce any further measures in relation to misleading advertising. During the period 2002-03, OFT obtained written assurances/undertakings in 25 cases. OFT obtained no Court Orders in 2000 or 2001. Court Orders obtained during 2002-03 were as follows: _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Court Order Advertiser 6 March 2002 Interim Injunction CMARS Planet Telecom plc 192enquiries.com Ltd. Peter Hutcheon John Tonge 30 May 2002 Final Injunction CMARS Data Protection Agency Services Ltd. Michael Sullivan 25 June 2002 Interim Injunction CMARS DPARS Ltd. Gary McNeish (both also trading as Data Protection Act Registration Service) 10 July 2002 Court Order (Stop Now Orders (EC John Christopher Ineson Blake Hamilton Directive) Regulations 2001) Ltd. Property Associates (UK) Ltd. 22 July 2002 Final Injunction CMARS Planet Telecom plc Peter Hutcheon John Tonge 12 November 2002 Final Injunction CMARS DPARS Ltd. Gary McNeish (both trading as Data Protection Act Registration Service) 7 August 2003 Interim Injunction CMARS Christopher Yewdall _________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Date

18 September 2003

Reference

129937; 410 c874W;410 c872W

House

House of Commons

Anti-social Behaviour Bill 2002/03

Anti-Social Behaviour Bill. Lords Committee stage first day. Clauses 1-18 agreed to. Clause 13 as amended. Schedule 1 agreed to.

Department

Home Office

Type

Committee of the Whole House (HL); Debates on bills

Date

11 September 2003

Reference

652 c431-68,478-542

House

House of Lords

Fire Services Bill 2002/03

Fire Services Bill. Lords Committee stage. Grand Committee off the floor of the House (Rooms 3A and 4B) third day. Clause 1 agreed to. Bill reported with amendments (HC Bill 99 2002/03).

Department

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Committee of the Whole House (HL)

Type

Debates on bills; Committee proceedings

Date

14 July 2003

Reference

651 c167-210GC

House

House of Lords

Anti-social Behaviour Bill 2002/03

Anti-Social Behaviour Bill. Committee stage sixth sitting (afternoon). Clauses 29 to 35 agreed to. New clause relating to Part 4 considered. Clause 12 to 14 agreed to. Clause 13 and 14 as amended. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clause 15 to 17 agreed to, clause 15 as amended.

Type

Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings

Notes

Received 14.05.03

Date

13 May 2003

Reference

SCG

House

House of Commons

Anti-social Behaviour Bill (Bill 83 of 2002/03)

Anti-social Behaviour Bill .(Bill 83 of 2002/03). House of Commons Library Research Paper 03/34.

Type

Commons Briefing papers

Date

4 April 2003

Reference

RP03-34

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Month

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher