Report

Part of Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill [HL] Report – in the House of Lords at 6:00 pm on 16 July 2012.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Lord Borrie Lord Borrie Labour 6:00, 16 July 2012

My Lords, if there is a "naming and shaming" proposal from the adjudicator, according to Clause 8 he or she has got to give written notice specifying,

"what information is to be published ... how it must be published... and... the time by which it must be published".

Clearly, there has to be a response to that. While it is not called an "appeal", none the less, because notice has to be given by the adjudicator as to what he intends and the supermarket can respond to that, there is a time factor, and there is in effect an opportunity for the supermarket to say further things that it wants to say.

The common-law rule of natural justice, which we all know about, is that everybody has a right to be heard before some decision is made which may be adverse to them. The rule of natural justice as I have always understood it is that you only have an opportunity to be heard once. You cannot call upon some right of appeal under that rule, because that would be giving you the right to be heard twice, and that is not the position. Of course, there is always judicial review but that is, I admit, limited in that you have to show something seriously wrong with the decision, and that no reasonable person would have made such a decision. It is fair enough that anybody should have a right of judicial review to have that checked, but no case for an appeal has been made out. The whole set-up of the adjudicator is meant to be fairly speedy and so on. Subject to the points I have mentioned-you have to be given advance notice about naming and shaming, and you have a right to respond to that-there is no call for any more than that.