Section 8: supplemental
Horserace Betting and Olympic Lottery Bill
3:45 pm
Mr James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 37, in
clause 9, page 7, line 7, leave out from 'for' to end of line and insert
'all such relief, by way of damages, injunction or otherwise, as the court thinks appropriate and the court may grant an injunction restraining an infringement or apprehended infringement of the right aforesaid whether or not any other relief is claimed.'.
This is a slightly more technical amendment. Clause 9(6) allows the successor company to proceed against somebody who commits or threatens a breach of the licence
''in the High Court or county court for damages or such other relief as the court thinks appropriate.''
Section 14(2) of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 allows the Tote to seek an injunction at the same time that another relief such as damages is claimed. The wording in the 1963 Act acknowledges that damages or an injunction alone may not be sufficient relief, whereas the wording in clause 9(6) allows the successor company to seek only
''damages or such other relief as the court thinks appropriate.''
The fact that the statute has been amended could be interpreted such that damages or such other relief—that is, an injunction—were now considered a sufficient remedy for the Tote. That would make it harder for the Tote to seek an injunction at the same time as damages.
The Tote has effectively used the provisions under section 14(2) of the 1963 Act on many occasions. Therefore, any new wording may lead to unnecessary confusion as to the remedies available to the Tote. It is clear that its position is stronger in such a situation if statute clearly states that an injunction and damages together are a possible remedy.
That is why I propose the amendment. Basically, it is trying to put into the Bill the same terminology as in the 1963 Act with regard to the Tote seeking an injunction against anyone who commits or threatens to commit a breach of licensing agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to request that the legislation stays the same, and I shall be interested in the Minister's response.