Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether the Lord Falconer of Thoroton or the Baroness Morgan of Huyton brought any information that the Prime Minister was satisfied about the factual grounds for concluding that Iraq was guilty of non-compliance and non-co-operation...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether the Lord Falconer of Thoroton or the Baroness Morgan of Huyton brought any information that the Prime Minister was satisfied about the factual grounds for concluding that Iraq was guilty of non-compliance and non-co-operation...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), in what ministerial capacity the Lord Falconer of Thoroton and the Baroness Morgan of Huyton were acting at the meeting on 13 March 2003. [HL 1801]. - Ref to 4 April 2005, 671 c69WA.

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), in what ministerial capacity the Lord Falconer of Thoroton and the Baroness Morgan of Huyton were acting at the meeting on 13 March 2003. [HL 1801]. - Ref to 4 April 2005, 671 c69WA.

Which members of the United States Administration the Attorney-General met or contacted prior to issuing his view on the legality of military action in Iraq. [HL 1805]. - Inc ref to 30 November 2004, CH428 c48W.

Which members of the United States Administration the Attorney-General met or contacted prior to issuing his view on the legality of military action in Iraq. [HL 1805]. - Inc ref to 30 November 2004, CH428 c48W.

Why the Attorney General informed individuals outside the Cabinet that it was his clear view that military action under Resolution 1441 was lawful, rather than first communicating it to the Cabinet. [HL 1802].

Why the Attorney General informed individuals outside the Cabinet that it was his clear view that military action under Resolution 1441 was lawful, rather than first communicating it to the Cabinet. [HL 1802].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005, 670 c1WA, whether the Attorney General sought any written advice from (a) the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs; (b) the Secretary of State for Defence; or (c) the Chief of the Defence Staff on...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005, 670 c1WA, whether the Attorney General sought any written advice from (a) the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs; (b) the Secretary of State for Defence; or (c) the Chief of the Defence Staff on...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 14 March 2005, 670 c107-108WA, where the meeting between the Attorney General, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff and foreign policy adviser and the Director of Government Relations took place; and which other officials were present for part or all...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 14 March 2005, 670 c107-108WA, where the meeting between the Attorney General, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff and foreign policy adviser and the Director of Government Relations took place; and which other officials were present for part or all...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether his Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA) was discussed unofficially with any other official, Minister or Member of either House of Parliament. [HL 1554].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether his Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA) was discussed unofficially with any other official, Minister or Member of either House of Parliament. [HL 1554].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), what were the positions of the officials involved in drawing up his Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA). [HL 1555].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), what were the positions of the officials involved in drawing up his Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA). [HL 1555].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether he discussed the substance of his views on the legality of the war with the Lord Falconer of Thoroton and the Baroness Morgan of Huyton on 28 February 2003, as suggested in paragraph 378...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), whether he discussed the substance of his views on the legality of the war with the Lord Falconer of Thoroton and the Baroness Morgan of Huyton on 28 February 2003, as suggested in paragraph 378...

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), why Christopher Greenwood QC was involved in drafting the Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA); and what advice he gave. [HL 1556].

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Goldsmith on 28 February 2005 (670 c1WA), why Christopher Greenwood QC was involved in drafting the Written Answer of 17 March 2003 (646 c2-3WA); and what advice he gave. [HL 1556].

Whether they will provide in full the advice given by the Attorney-General on the legality of the invasion of Iraq; and whether they will make available all related documents. [HL 611]. - Including ref to 12 January 2004 656 c65WA.

Whether they will provide in full the advice given by the Attorney-General on the legality of the invasion of Iraq; and whether they will make available all related documents. [HL 611]. - Including ref to 12 January 2004 656 c65WA.