Debates between Lord Bellamy and Lord Sandhurst during the 2019 Parliament

Nuptial Agreements

Debate between Lord Bellamy and Lord Sandhurst
Tuesday 25th April 2023

(1 year ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bellamy Portrait Lord Bellamy (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, it is hard for me to add to my previous answer. The Government feel that we must look at the whole landscape and get the law on financial provision sorted out, and that gives us the context in which we can decide what to do about prenups.

Lord Sandhurst Portrait Lord Sandhurst (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as others have said today, such a Bill can stand completely independently of the planned reform. The whole point is that those who embark on this do not want to litigate, in the unhappy event of a divorce, and do not want to expose themselves to all the uncertainties of the court’s discretion. Why on earth can the Government not do something about it now?

Lord Bellamy Portrait Lord Bellamy (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, it is not a straight- forward issue; even the Law Commission’s report of 2014 made it clear that there had to be quite a number of exceptions in relation to financial need before one could legislate. As I say, the Government prefer to proceed on a broad front rather than deal with this issue specifically.

European Court of Human Rights

Debate between Lord Bellamy and Lord Sandhurst
Monday 5th September 2022

(1 year, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bellamy Portrait Lord Bellamy (Con)
- Hansard - -

I entirely understand the sentiments expressed by the noble Lord.

Lord Sandhurst Portrait Lord Sandhurst (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the Strasbourg court in Al-Skeini v United Kingdom made a fundamental and damaging error and acted inconsistently with the Vienna convention in holding that the procedural duty under Article 2 of the convention has extraterritorial effect? Has that not damaged the court’s standing in this country and abroad?