There are 5,384 results relating to "table.i V"
Order by
|
Official Report
Meeting date:
27 March 2025
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee 27 March 2025
Before I introduce our witnesses, I should state that there is an active court case that is relevant to the committee’s inquiry—Biffa Waste Services Ltd v the Scottish ministers. Given that the case is currently active, we have sought the Presiding Officer’s permission to be able to refer to the deposit return scheme exclusion process today.
Official Report
Meeting date:
31 May 2023
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee 31 May 2023
In response to COSLA’s submission, the petitioner highlights that the single status agreement is almost two and a half decades old and that pay disparity exists between areas such as Edinburgh and Glasgow. The Harpur Trust v Brazel case from 2022 is highlighted and put into the context of the petition, with cautionary points about the potential implications...
Last updated:
11 September 2020
SPBill35S052018
.”, and the title of the section becomes “Periodical payment orders”. (2) After section 2B of the Damages Act 1996 there is inserted— “2C Secure continuity of periodical payments (1) For the purpose of section 2(1A), a court is to assume that the continuity of 35 payment under an order is reasonably secure if— (a) the right to receive the payments would be protected by— (i) a guarantee under section 6 or Schedule 1, or Damages (Investment Returns and Periodical Payments) (Scotland) Bill 3 Part 2—Periodical payments of damages (ii) a scheme under section 213 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (whether or not as modified by section 4 of this Act), or (b) the source of payment would be a recognised body or office-holder listed in subsection (6). 5 (2) In an order for periodical payments, a court may include provision— (a) specifying the method by which the payments are to be made, (b) requiring the person responsible for making the payments to take specified action to secure the continuity of payment, where the continuity of payment is not considered by the court to be reasonably 10 secure by virtue of subsection (1), (c) enabling an application to be made to the court for variation of provision included in the order under paragraph (a) or (b). (3) Despite inclusion in an order for periodical payments of provision of the kind mentioned in subsection (2)(a), the payments may be made by a different 15 method if under the different method— (a) the right to receive the payments is protected in one of the ways mentioned in subsection (1)(a), or (b) the source of payment is a recognised body or office-holder listed in subsection (6). 20 (4) The court may vary the order in respect of provision of the kind mentioned in subsection (2)(a) or (b) but only if— (a) an application is made to the court in accordance with provision included in the order under subsection (2)(c), and (b) the court is satisfied that the continuity of payment under the order 25 would still be reasonably secure (with subsection (1) to be used for this too). (5) As regards cases involving future pecuniary loss, subsection (4)(a) does not prevent variation of the order under section 2F(2)(a)(v...
Last updated:
9 December 2019
$name
.”, and the title of the section becomes “Periodical payment orders”. (2) After section 2B of the Damages Act 1996 there is inserted— “2C Secure continuity of periodical payments 35 (1) For the purpose of section 2(1A), a court is to assume that the continuity of payment under an order is reasonably secure if— (a) the right to receive the payments would be protected by— Damages (Investment Returns and Periodical Payments) (Scotland) Bill 3 Part 2—Periodical payments of damages (i) a guarantee under section 6 or Schedule 1, or (ii) a scheme under section 213 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (whether or not as modified by section 4 of this Act), or (b) the source of payment would be a recognised body or office-holder listed 5 in subsection (6). (2) In an order for periodical payments, a court may include provision— (a) specifying the method by which the payments are to be made, (b) requiring the person responsible for making the payments to take specified action to secure the continuity of payment, where the 10 continuity of payment is not considered by the court to be reasonably secure by virtue of subsection (1), (c) enabling an application to be made to the court for variation of provision included in the order under paragraph (a) or (b). (3) Despite inclusion in an order for periodical payments of provision of the kind 15 mentioned in subsection (2)(a), the payments may be made by a different method if under the different method— (a) the right to receive the payments is protected in one of the ways mentioned in subsection (1)(a), or (b) the source of payment is a recognised body or office-holder listed in 20 subsection (6). (4) The court may vary the order in respect of provision of the kind mentioned in subsection (2)(a) or (b) but only if— (a) an application is made to the court in accordance with provision included in the order under subsection (2)(c), and 25 (b) the court is satisfied that the continuity of payment under the order would still be reasonably secure (with subsection (1) to be used for this too). (5) As regards cases involving future pecuniary loss, subsection (4)(a) does not prevent variation of the order under section 2F(2)(a)(v...
Last updated:
21 November 2019
$name
.”, and the title of the section becomes “Periodical payment orders”. (2) After section 2B of the Damages Act 1996 there is inserted— Damages (Investment Returns and Periodical Payments) (Scotland) Bill 3 Part 2—Periodical payments of damages “2C Secure continuity of periodical payments (1) For the purpose of section 2(1A), a court is to assume that the continuity of payment under an order is reasonably secure if— (a) the right to receive the payments would be protected by— 5 (i) a guarantee under section 6 or Schedule 1, or (ii) a scheme under section 213 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (whether or not as modified by section 4 of this Act), or (b) the source of payment would be a recognised body or office-holder listed in subsection (6). 10 (2) In an order for periodical payments, a court may include provision— (a) specifying the method by which the payments are to be made, (b) requiring the person responsible for making the payments to take specified action to secure the continuity of payment, where the continuity of payment is not considered by the court to be reasonably 15 secure by virtue of subsection (1), (c) enabling an application to be made to the court for variation of provision included in the order under paragraph (a) or (b). (3) Despite inclusion in an order for periodical payments of provision of the kind mentioned in subsection (2)(a), the payments may be made by a different 20 method if under the different method— (a) the right to receive the payments is protected in one of the ways mentioned in subsection (1)(a), or (b) the source of payment is a recognised body or office-holder listed in subsection (6). 25 (4) The court may vary the order in respect of provision of the kind mentioned in subsection (2)(a) or (b) but only if— (a) an application is made to the court in accordance with provision included in the order under subsection (2)(c), and (b) the court is satisfied that the continuity of payment under the order is still 30 reasonably secure (with subsection (1) to be used for this too). (5) As regards cases involving future pecuniary loss, subsection (4)(a) does not prevent variation of the order under section 2F(2)(a)(v...
Official Report
Meeting date:
23 June 2011
Meeting of the Parliament 23 June 2011
Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate 8. To ask the Scottish Executive what changes it proposes to make in relation to solicitors’ access to prisoners in police custody in light of the Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate ruling.
Official Report
Meeting date:
18 September 2025
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee 18 September 2025
It happens to be administered through the V&A, but it is money that comes directly from Arts Council England.
Official Report
Meeting date:
19 May 2022
Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee 19 May 2022
If we look at that in a more contextualised way, we can see it cropping up, of course, in imperial law and in the case that was referred to in Miller of Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke, which was about the Rhodesian Parliament.
Committees
Published:
23 November 2021
Subsidy Control Bill – some constitutional considerations
’ (15 July 2021) EU Relations Law, available at https://eurelationslaw.com/blog/the-subsidy-control-bill-and-devolution-a-balanced-regime.
3. AXA General Insurance v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46 at para 49 per Lord Hope.
4.
Committee reports
Date published:
27 September 2017
Subordinate legislation considered by the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee on 26 September 2017
Given the existence of judicial review and that the interpretation of public pension regulations is an area of special expertise, it is thought that regulation 19 is compatible with a right to a fair hearing under article 6 (see for example R. (on the application of Cart) v. Upper Tribunal 2012 UK SC20, [2012] 1 A.C. 663; and R (Alconbury Developments) v Secretary of State for the Environment [2001] 2 WLR 1389.).
