Courts Bill 2016: Committee Stage

I ask that all members have a copy of the amendment groupings as this is an important aid to the business in hand. I advise members that following a decision yesterday in the committee, we will take the Courts Bill 2016 and the first three sections will be removed. This committee must physically do that. It is not something that can be done in advance. Deputies Seamus Healy, Jim O'Callaghan, Catherine Murphy, Róisín Shortall, Richard Boyd Barrett, Bríd Smith and Gino Kenny have tabled four amendments in the first section. The Deputies can press those amendments if they choose but knowing that when I put the proposition on the section, that the section will fall. The Deputies can advise the Chairman that they are withdrawing the amendment. The option is entirely the Deputies', I am in their hands. I advise that this is the mechanism by which we can proceed with section 4 and the rest of the Bill as it presents. I am in the hands of the Deputies when it comes to it. Deputy Healy has amendment No. 1 and he has the choice to have his amendment addressed or he can withdraw it. This is informal advice as the situation is unusual. I am only advising members as I would have appreciated as a member of the committee myself in the past. I am indicating that Deputies have the option to withdraw their amendments when I ask if the section stands part of the Bill as it will be lost. That will apply also to sections 2 and 3. Is this helpful and are there any questions in that regard? We are okay.

I advise that all mobile phones should be switched off as, even in silent mode, they cause interference with the recording equipment in the Dáil Chamber. This meeting has been convened to consider the Committee Stage of the Courts Bill 2016. I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality, Deputy David Stanton and his officials.

SECTION 1

I move amendment No 1:

In page 3, to delete lines 15 to 22.

This amendment deals with a retrospective aspect of the Bill and on the basis that this section is going to fall I will not press the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I move amendment No 2:

In page 3, to delete lines 31 and 32 and in page 4, to delete lines 1 to 7, and substitute the following:

“(b) before the date of the passing of this Act, any party to those proceedings had queried, whether through pleadings or otherwise, the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court to adjudicate on the claim in being, or the Circuit Court had of its own motion raised that issue in the course of dealing with those proceedings.”.

I adopt the same stance as Deputy Healy and I shall withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Deputies who tabled amendments Nos. 3 and 4 are not present.

Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 not moved.
Section 1 deleted.
SECTION 2

I move amendment No 5:

In page 4, between lines 37 and 38, to insert the following:

“2. Dáil Éireann formally declares that a housing emergency exists in the State and while this emergency continues the right of any person to remain in the dwelling in which the person currently resides will take precedence over any property right of any other person—

(a) accordingly no court or other authority shall order the removal of the current occupant of a dwelling, or by its decisions enable such removal notwithstanding the provisions of any Act currently in force including the provisions of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013,

(b) the housing emergency declared in this section can only be terminated by a vote of Dáil Éireann, and the Government including any Minister of the Government are precluded from annulling the housing emergency without approval in such a vote,

(c) in view of the Housing Emergency declared here, the power of any Minister of Government to raise the market value threshold of €75,000 for single or multiple dwellings for consideration of possession of dwellings cases by the Circuit Court by activating or commencing sections of existing Acts without approval by a vote of Dáil Éireann, is cancelled.”.

I wish to press this amendment. I understand that the first three sections are to be deleted, but this amendment is an addendum, or addition, and it is not at all related to the Hogan judgment, which has no bearing on this amendment by way of addendum. It is a significant amendment and in my view it is important. It is the cornerstone of any proper procedure to address the housing emergency we have in the State now.

With regard to procedure and for the Deputy's information, if the amendment is pressed and if it is accepted and I put the section, as amended, it will then be excluded because it would be part of the section to be deleted. I can only indicate to the Deputy that there is an expectation, and anticipation, that section 2 will not stand part of the Bill. That is unusual but I must say it because it has already been addressed by the committee members. I am advising the Deputy that he will embark upon an exercise at the end of which he will find that section 2 will not continue. This is the agreement, as already stated, of members of the committee and the Minister.

Is there a possible procedural way out? For example, if Deputy Healy was to withdraw this amendment now he could put it in on Report Stage in a different part of the Bill, could he not?

Absolutely, so the matter is there. Yes.

I accept that, and obviously I can do that.

It is a very important amendment. There is a proposal by which this section will be deleted which will affect the outcome on this amendment. I am not a member of the committee. I will, therefore, defer to the committee and withdraw the amendment, but I will reintroduce it on Report Stage.

At a different location in the Bill.

To a different section. It is a stand-alone amendment that would in no way impinge on the Hogan judgment. It might have been properly introduced to insert a new section. On the basis of what has been said, I will withdraw it at this stage, but I will reintroduce it on Report Stage.

The fact that the Deputy is not a member of the committee does not in any way impair his opportunity to participate in the debate. His presence and participation are hugely welcome. It is an unfortunate consequence of the arrangement to allow the Courts Bill to proceed, but he will have an opportunity to retable the amendment in a more advantageous position within the legislation on Report Stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 2 deleted.

There is one amendment proposed to section 3. However, as the movers of the amendment are not present, it cannot be moved.

Amendment No. 6 not moved.
Section 3 deleted.

Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, are no longer part of the Bill. We will proceed to deal with section 4 and the remaining sections. There are no amendments proposed to section 4.

It might be a procedural issue. For the purposes of debate, amendment No. 10 was grouped with three other amendments that were not moved for the reasons stated by the Chairman. Does that mean we should discuss amendment No. 10 now or can we wait?

We can wait.

I just wanted to be sure.

We can be flexible in the matter. Amendment No. 10 will be discussed in the normal course. Would the Minister of State like to say anything at this point before we proceed to deal with the remaining sections?

I thank the Chairman and committee members for facilitating the discussion on the Bill. I understand the reservations and hesitation of the committee on sections 1 to 3, inclusive. I thanked Deputy Jim O'Callaghan for raising the matter last week. It means that those sections are no longer part of the Bill. I regret the omission. Having said that, I thank the committee for its readiness to proceed with the remaining sections dealing with the Office of the Taxing Master. It is important that members like Deputy Jim O'Callaghan raise issues of concern. I did it for many years from the Opposition side. It is important that members feel free to do so and raise matters of concern as this is where we discuss them. I am happy to proceed with the remaining sections and hope we can get through the Bill before the time elapses.

Before we proceed with section 4, I want to ask the Minister of State a quick question about the Title of the Bill. Is it his intention to delete the first paragraph as it relates to sections 1 to 3, inclusive, which have been deleted from the Bill? Is this something he will do at the end of the process?

A change will be made to that effect.

That is a valid question. The Title of the Bill has not yet been changed.

To be clear, we could not change it until the sections were formally removed.

I appreciate that, but the Minister of State could have been sure that they would be removed. The committee was certainly very sure they would be.

Until the process was formally completed this morning, we could not change it.

It is not a problem.

It will be done.

It gives the impression that we are excluding the relevant sections only to include them again on Report Stage. That undermines the deletion of sections 1 to 3, inclusive, on which we should have a broad discussion on Committee Stage.

We will table an amendment to make the change.

Will it be done in this session?

It will be done on Report Stage. We have not tabled an amendment to be discussed this morning. We are signalling that we will do it on Report Stage. That is normal procedure.

At the conclusion of our discourse I will be obliged to read the Title of the Bill and seek the agreement of the committee on it. I suggest somebody speedily address what needs to be removed.

We will do so at the time. We will indicate-----

It would be helpful if it were to be done while we were dealing with the rest of the Bill.

We have indicated our intention to make that change.

We will do it now.

I am indicating our intention to make the change.

It is important that the Title not be voted through if it refers to the sections that have been deleted.

We can do it when we come to it.

We will need the amendment before we conclude Committee Stage.

We can agree to the amendment here.

That is fine. I thank Deputy Jack Chambers. As I said, there are no amendments to section 4.

Sections 4 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 8
Question proposed: "That section 8 stand part of the Bill."

There are no amendments to the section. It was indicated by members who are not in attendance that they were opposed to it.

Question put and agreed to.
NEW SECTIONS

Amendments Nos. 7, 8 and 11 have been grouped. Amendment No. 11 is to the Title of the Bill. Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 are not included in this group of amendments.

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 10, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“Amendment of paragraph 18 of Eighth Schedule to Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961

9. Paragraph 18 (inserted by the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011) of the Eighth Schedule to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 is amended—

(a) in subparagraph (6)(a), by the substitution, for “clauses (b) and (c)”, of “clauses (b) and (c) and subparagraphs (7) to (9)”,

(b) in subparagraph (6)(c), by the insertion, after “shall”, of “, subject to subparagraphs (7) to (9),”, and

(c) by the insertion, after subparagraph (6), of the following:

“(7) If, in the opinion of the Minister, the making of the determination next mentioned in this subparagraph is appropriate, the term of office of a person who has been appointed to be a Taxing-Master may be extended by such period, not exceeding 3 years from the date of expiry of that term, as the Minister decides and specifies in a determination made by him or her for the purpose of this subparagraph.

(8) In addition to its being exercisable before the term of office of the person concerned has expired, the power under subparagraph (7) to make a determination under that subparagraph may be exercised in relation to the term of office of a person referred to therein which has expired if the following conditions are fulfilled—

(a) before that expiry, the Minister has communicated, in writing, to the person concerned the Minister’s desire in general terms that the person continue to serve as a Taxing-Master, and

(b) the Minister is satisfied that had subparagraph (7) been enacted before that expiry the Minister would have exercised, before that expiry, the power under that subparagraph to make a determination thereunder in relation to the term of office of that person, and such a determination that is made after the expiry of the person’s term of office is referred to in subparagraph (9) as a ‘post-expiry determination’.

(9) A post-expiry determination shall have retrospective effect, that is to say it shall operate to continue the person concerned in office as a Taxing-Master (for the period specified in the determination) from the date of expiry of his or her original term of office, and anything done by the person on or from that expiry and before the making of the postexpiry determination shall be as good and effectual as it would have been had the determination been made before the expiry of the person’s original term of office.”.”.

This is a Government amendment which seeks to make provision for the extension of the period in office of a taxing master by up to three years. Amendment No. 8 provides for the procedures for the completion or carryover of any work in hand in the Office of the Taxing Master. Amendment No. 9 provides for the consequential changes that need to be made to the Long Title of the Bill to include these provisions.

Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 are being made in support of the smooth and orderly transition of the Office of the Taxing Master to that of a new legal costs adjudicator under the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, including the completion of any case in hand that has already been referred for taxation and where the initial Taxing Master is no longer available. The Office of the Taxing Master will become the Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicator once the relevant provisions of Part 10 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 are commenced. The commencement of this major undertaking and the coming on stream of the new Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicator are anticipated to take place early in the new year. Members will recall that the new Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicator will be bolstered in its legal costs adjudications by a set of legal cost principles contained in Schedule 1 to the 2015 Act. It will have modern strategic and business management structures and maintain a register of its legal cost determinations which will be accessible by the public. These structural reforms will complement the wider legal cost transparency measures in the 2015 Act. It should also be noted that the title of the new office moves away from the use of the term "taxation" which was confusing for the general public which would more usually associate it with the work of the Revenue Commissioners but which bears no relation to it.

The legal services regulation rules were originally published in the autumn of 2011 and it was anticipated that the legal costs and other provisions would be enacted within a period of two years from that date.

However, the enactment of the Legal Services Regulation Bill did not take place until December 2015, with the competing legislative priorities of the troika programme and a change of Government in between. It is now going to be the case, therefore, that the terms of office of existing Taxing Masters will have expired before the changeover to the new legal costs adjudicators under the Legal Services Regulation Act will have taken place. Amendment No. 7 provides a practical means of managing and bridging this emerging gap.

At present, paragraph 18(6) of the Eighth Schedule to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961, as amended, provides that a person appointed to the office of Taxing Master shall not be eligible for re-appointment or to have the term of appointment extended. Amendment No. 7 proposes to overcome this prohibition. It does this by seeking to allow for extension of the term of appointment concerned up to a maximum of three years - this is now to be found in the proposed new paragraph 18 (7) of the Eighth Schedule. For the reasons I have outlined, the extension of the period of appointment of a Taxing Master is now considered a crucial option to have for the orderly and effective transition of the Office of the Taxing Master to that of the Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicators. It will allow for the retention of critical working capacity and management expertise as may be considered appropriate to lead and drive this complex process. It will also enable the necessary steps to be taken for any existing workload of taxation cases to be brought to completion. Due to the automatic expiry of the existing term of office of a Taxing Master under current law this capacity and expertise will otherwise start to become unavailable in the coming weeks.

The proposed three year period of extension will also allow for the operation, as may be considered appropriate, of the transitional provisions of section 164 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. This section provides for the designation by the Minister for Justice and Equality of a person who is serving as a Taxing Master to perform the functions of the Chief Legal Costs Adjudicator or of a legal costs adjudicator in what will be the newly established Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicators. This designation will be effective for the remainder of the relevant term of office as a Taxing Master. The additional paragraphs 18(8) and (9) for the Eighth Schedule under amendment No. 7 provide that the new power to extend the term of office under paragraph 18(7) may, in the strict circumstances prescribed, be exercised after the term of office has expired and that such a post-expiry determination shall have retrospective effect. Provision is being made for such a contingency to enable extension of a term of office to take place notwithstanding the date on which this Bill may be enacted.

Amendment No. 8 proposes to change the Eighth Schedule to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 by the insertion of a new paragraph 18A. The new paragraph deals with a variety of working options to be applied in completing the functions of a Taxing Master which may not have been fully performed on the occasion of his or her vacating office. This amendment is considered necessary to allow for the completion of matters referred for taxation which may be in train at the time a Taxing Master vacates his or her office. This is intended to provide the maximum degree of clarity regarding the procedural requirements arising from the completion of a particular matter by a Taxing Master who is not the Taxing Master to whom the matter was originally assigned and where the initial Taxing Master is no longer available.

The new paragraph 18A contains six subparagraphs. Subparagraph (1) deals with interpretation matters relating to the paragraph as a whole. Subparagraph (2) provides, in general terms, that another Taxing Master may perform functions relating to a particular matter which had been assigned to an initial Taxing Master who is not available to perform those functions. Subparagraph (3) provides that the alternative Taxing Master shall conduct a complete re-hearing of a matter on which an initial Taxing Master had commenced but not completed a hearing. However, it should also be noted that it is also open to the parties concerned to consent in such instances to the first hearing being resumed. Subparagraph (4) provides, in general terms, for the exercise by the alternative Taxing Master of the jurisdiction and powers initially conferred where the initial Taxing Master is no longer available. Subparagraph (5) provides that the Taxing Master who has been duly designated by the Government to be responsible for the management of the Office of the Taxing Master shall have the power to determine any question regarding the application of these bridging provisions to a particular matter and, in consequence of any such determination, to give directions. Subparagraph (6) provides that the new paragraph 18A is without prejudice to the general law but that a particular procedure set out in the paragraph shall prevail.

Amendment No. 11 is a technical amendment proposed by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. It is somewhat self explanatory in that it proposes the amendment of the long Title of the Bill. The proposed amendment to the long Title is to add the necessary element that the Eighth Schedule to the Act of 1961 and section 139(2) of the Act of 2015 are also to be amended by this Bill.

There is also the additional amendment proposing to delete the words "and, in particular," up to "Valuation Act 2001", as suggested earlier.

Amendment No. 7 agreed to.

We will proceed with the amendments proposed to section 9. Amendment No. 11 is the last amendment we will address and it will be helpful to have clarity about the altered Title.

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 10, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“Further amendment of Eighth Schedule to Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961

10. The Eighth Schedule to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 is amended by the insertion, after paragraph 18, of the following—

“18A. (1)In this paragraph—

(a) ‘particular Taxing-Master’ means the particular Taxing-Master to whom the matter referred to in subparagraph (2) has been assigned for the purpose of the functions there referred to being performed in relation to it;

(b) ‘principal Taxing-Master’ means the Taxing-Master who has been designated by the Government under paragraph 8; and

(c) a reference to the particular Taxing-Master not being available, due to whatever cause, to perform one or more, or any, functions includes a reference to his or her not being so available in consequence of his or her having vacated office.

(2) Where the functions of a Taxing-Master fall to be performed in relation to a particular matter and the case is either a case—

(a) in which none of those functions has been performed in relation to the matter by the particular Taxing-Master, or

(b) in which the particular Taxing-Master has performed one or more, but not all, of those functions in relation to the matter, then those functions, or such of those functions as remain to be performed, in relation to the matter may be performed by another Taxing-Master if, due to whatever cause, the particular Taxing-Master is not available to perform those functions (or such of them as remain to be performed), but this is subject to subparagraph (3).

(3) Where the particular Taxing-Master had commenced, but had not completed, a hearing in relation to the matter concerned, the other Taxing-Master referred to in subparagraph (2) shall conduct a complete re-hearing in relation to the matter unless the parties to the matter consent in writing to the first-mentioned hearing being resumed by him or her at the appropriate juncture (that is to say the stage at which that hearing was at before the occurrence of the circumstances which gave rise to subparagraph (2)’s application).

(4) In any case falling within subparagraph (2), the jurisdiction and powers conferred on a Taxing-Master by or under this Act, or any other enactment, to give or make a ruling, direction or decision in circumstances generally (namely circumstances where the nonavailability of the Taxing-Master, as mentioned in that subparagraph, does not arise) shall be exercisable in relation to the matter concerned by the other Taxing-Master mentioned in that subparagraph.

(5) Where—

(a) any question arises as to whether particular circumstances that have occurred are circumstances that fall within subparagraph (2), or

(b) it appears to the principal Taxing-Master that such a question may have arisen,

each of the following is exercisable by the principal Taxing-Master, namely the power—

(i) to determine the question,

(ii) in the case of clause (b), to determine, as a preliminary matter, whether the question actually arises and, if the determination is that it does so arise, to determine it, and

(iii) in consequence of any determination made under either of the preceding subclauses, to give such directions as he or she thinks appropriate.

(6) This paragraph is without prejudice to the general law concerning the procedure to be adopted in a case in which a function falling to be performed by a person has not, on the occasion of his or her vacating office, been fully performed but, to the extent that a preceding subparagraph requires or enables a particular procedure to be adopted that is different from that which would be required to be adopted (in the circumstances concerned) by the general law, the preceding subparagraph concerned shall prevail (or, as the case may be, the particular procedure that it enables to be adopted may be adopted).”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 10, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“Amendment of section 139(2) of Legal Services Regulation Act 2015

11. Section 139(2) of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 is amended—

(a) by the substitution, for “The Minister may”, of “The Government may”, and

(b) in paragraph (b), by the substitution, for “that the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, determines”, of “as the Government determine”.”.

The Office of the Attorney General has advised that this amendment to section 139(2) is required in order to rectify a discrepancy arising from the language used in that section in its current form. Basically, it is a technical amendment. The effect of the proposed amendment is to confirm, for consistency and legal clarity, that the Chief Legal Costs Adjudicator and the legal costs adjudicators being referred to may be appointed by the “Government’. This should remove any legal ambiguity that might otherwise arise from that section's current use of the word "Minister".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 10:

10. In page 10, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“Amendment of Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013

9. The Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013 is amended by the insertion, after section 4, of the following:

“Protection of tenants on repossessed land

4A. (1) Where a mortgagee goes into possession of land of a mortgagor, or appoints a receiver to land pursuant to its rights as mortgagee, whether under statute or contract, then the said mortgagee or receiver, notwithstanding the provision of any other statute, shall be precluded from exercising any right, howsoever arising, to terminate any tenancy on that land that may then exist in favour of a third party, for a period of twelve months from the date of the appointment of the receiver or the mortgagee going into possession, or the expiry of any other statutory or contractual rights which arise in favour of the tenant, whichever is later.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply where—

(a) the tenancy was created in breach of any subsisting right of the mortgagee, save where an equity arises in favour of the tenant out of any act or omission on the part of the mortgagee or receiver which serves to cure such breach, or

(b) the tenant is in material breach of his contract of tenancy.”.”.

In light of the fact that sections Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, have fallen it is not necessary to proceed with this amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 9 agreed to.
TITLE

We need clarification of the exact wording before I can put the Title of the Bill to the committee.

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 3, line 10, after “2000,” to insert the following:

“to amend the Eighth Schedule to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 and section 139(2) of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015,”.

As was pointed out by the Deputies, particularly Deputy Jack Chambers, I propose to delete, after the word "Court", the words "and, in particular, to make provision in relation to the jurisdiction of each of those Courts in the case of proceedings respecting land that is not rateable under the Valuation Act 2001,". The Title resumes with "to amend certain enactments...". It is everything from "and" in line 3 to "2001".

I have a different wording. On the wording the Minister of State is reading from when he says the word "and", I have a copy of it here but the word "and" does not appear in line 3.

It is the Title at the end of the Bill.

It is in a different layout before me. I have it here. So that we all are on the one page, we are referring to the back page of the Bill where one will see the typed formula of words. Would the Minister of State mind helping us, once again, with that ?

I propose to delete everything after the word "Court", in line 3, down as far as "2001" in line 7.

It is "An Act to make provision in relation to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court and the District Court and"-----

No. The "and" is gone.

The "and" is gone. Therefore, we take from "and" down to-----

To "to amend certain enactments concerning the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court ... ."

Therefore, we are taking out the words, "and, in particular, to make provision in relation to the jurisdiction of each of those Courts in the case of proceedings respecting land that is not rateable under the Valuation Act 2001".

Yes, that is it.

Is that the deletion?

Is that the entirety?

Keep the comma.

Keep the comma.

The comma remains.

Absolutely, it is precious.

Yes, it is important.

Is that, in the Minister of State's view, the entirety of what needs to change in the Title?

That is what I propose.

For the sake of clarity, I will read what now stands because this is important.

What is now being left in the Bill is that it is not really making provision for jurisdiction in the Circuit Court and the District Court. It is amending certain enactments concerning the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court and the District Court. If one looks at the contents of the Bill, sections 4 to 9, inclusive, which we have put in, are all amendments. Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, have been deleted or have fallen. As a result, I suggest that while I agree with the deletion proposed by the Minister of State I would also include the first two lines so that it would read, "An Act", and I would then take out "to make provision in relation to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court and the District Court", and what the Minister of State has suggested, so that the new Title would be: "An Act to amend certain enactments concerning the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court and the District Court ... ", and leave the rest of it as is. Obviously, the Minister may want to include something about the amendment to the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 and the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, if he wants to.

I can accept that absolutely.

I have to put amendment No. 11, as amended, and then, read the full Title into the record. Deputy O'Callaghan's proposition was for a further deletion of the words, "to make provision in relation to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court and the District Court", but he also made an addendum to that of the offer of the facilitation to the Minister of State to include reference to other decisions consequential on what we have already agreed. Does the Minister of State wish to-----

That is covered by, " and to provide for related matters", at this time.

Fine, that is agreeable.

Therefore, we will let that run.

I thank the Members. It is important that we have it absolutely right.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Title, as amended, be the Title to the Bill."

There is one other amendment to be made to the Long Title.

The Minister of State will have to assist me.

It is, in page 3, line 10, after "Planning and Development Act 2000," to insert "to amend the Eighth Schedule to Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 and section 139(2) of Legal Services Regulation Act 2015".

The Minister of State will bear with me one moment because this is not here.

It has already been discussed and agreed. It is just a matter of putting it. It is to amend the Title to include the Taxing-Master amendments.

I read from the amended back page of the text of the Bill rather than from the pink sheets. I beg the committee's pardon. I will re-read the Title and seek the Members' agreement.

Question put and agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment.

I thank the members for their co-operation and patience. I also thank the Minister and his officials for attending.