Justice 2 Committee, 28 Oct 2003

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 28, 2003

Official Report 91KB pdf

---

Subordinate Legislation

---

Lands Tribunal for Scotland (Relevant Certificate) (Fees) Rules 2003 <br />(SSI 2003/451)<br />Lands Tribunal for Scotland Rules 2003 (SSI 2003/452)

---

Title Conditions (Scotland) Act 2003 (Conservation Bodies) Order 2003 <br />(SSI 2003/453)

I welcome the witnesses from the Executive. Norman Macleod and Edythe Murie—that is an unusual spelling of Edythe—are from the office of the solicitor to the Scottish Executive, and Joyce Lugton is from the Scottish Executive Justice Department. I am grateful to them for joining us. I am sorry that they have been kept waiting, but the justice committees' discussion on our draft report on the budget proved a little more extended than we had anticipated.

Members have before them the three negative instruments that are to be considered under agenda item 3. Our witnesses have kindly made themselves available to answer any questions that arise. I normally ask witnesses if they want to say anything, but as we already have a lot of background information, and unless the witnesses are terribly enthusiastic about making an introductory statement, I will simply move to committee members' questions.

I am happy to proceed in that way.

I asked the clerk to let the Law Society of Scotland know that we were considering the Lands Tribunal for Scotland Rules 2003 (SSI 2003/452). I have received an e-mail from the Law Society that raises one or two technical points. If the committee agrees, I will fire them at our witnesses for comment, although I do not think that they contain anything terribly alarming. One of the points is that rule 17, which concerns the administration of oaths, does not appear to contain any provision to allow witnesses to make an affirmation. Is there a reason for that?

Under the Oaths Act 1978, an affirmation can be made instead of any oath.

So existing legislation provides that facility?

Yes.

That answers the first point.

The Law Society’s second point seems a little more technical. The e-mail states:

"Although there is a form given in Schedule 1 for the reference of disputes over compensation in School Sites cases (s 86 TC Act) there is no form given for a reference under s 87 TC Act—entailed sites under the Entail Sites Act 1840—although they follow a parallel procedure to s 86 cases. This omission is repeated in the Explanatory notes."

Would the witnesses like a copy of the e-mail?

We had prior notice of the question and my colleague has come prepared with an answer.

One form covers both kinds of application—a separate application form is not required.

Sorry—the Law Society's e-mail has misled me. I thought that the two points referred to the Lands Tribunal for Scotland Rules 2003, but they do not; the second point relates to the Title Conditions (Scotland) Act 2003 (Conservation Bodies) Order 2003 (SSI 2003/453). On you go.

The point refers to an application to the Lands Tribunal in respect of provisions in the Title Conditions (Scotland) Act 2003 for school sites and entailed sites. Separate application forms are not required because the same provision in the act covers both types of application. Section 86(5) deals with school sites and section 87(1) applies the provisions of section 86(5) to applications under the Entail Sites Act 1840.

So there has not been an omission.

One form can be used for both kinds of application.

That is a helpful reassurance. As members have no further questions, I thank the witnesses for their brief but helpful appearance, which has enabled us to address the issues that the Law Society of Scotland raised. We are grateful to you for that.

May I assume that there is no objection to noting the three instruments?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Advice and Assistance (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2003 (SSI 2003/421)

Because it is tidier, we will move on to agenda item 4, which is also on subordinate legislation. Is it agreed that we have no points to make on the regulations?

Members indicated agreement.