Coroners and Justice Bill

[Pete Mitchell]

Nicholas Bohm wrote  on 27-01-09 12:05:
> 
> 50B would be read as limited by the purposes of 50A (information
> sharing), and the process you describe would be held to be ultra vires.
> 

I would like to be quite sure of that. Most statutes I have read, where 
  para 99(b) is intended to modify the action of para 99(a), it begins 
something like "For the purposes of s.99(a)", or some similar wording. 
To take an example with which we are all familiar, "(3) Where, in a case 
in which a disclosure requirement in respect of any protected 
information is imposed on any person by a section 49 notice ... ". The 
words make clear that the text that follows applies only to the 
paragraphs explicitly cited.

Whereas the statement "An information-sharing order may (h) modify any 
enactment" can at least be argued by a malevolent Attorney-General to 
mean exactly what it says - *any* enactment.

Unless there is specific and incontrovertible case law to stop them, I 
wouldn't trust this bunch of criminals one single inch. In fact, not 
even then.

-- 
Pete Mitchell