The Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848) Regulations 2017 - not laid before parliament 21 days beforehand as is convention

The request was successful.

Dear House of Lords,

The Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848) Regulations 2017 - not laid before parliament 21 days beforehand as is convention

The Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848) Regulations 2017 were not laid before parliament 21 days beforehand as is convention what gives these amendment regulations force or effect ?

Especially, when private individuals are being made bankrupt unlawful without due process of law and deputy district judges within the (local) county court that now covers the whole of England and Wales are satisfied that the EC/EU regulation does apply under Artice 3 as main proceeding and are thereby treating "customers who are not businesses" of district council billing authorites ( also sometimes now re-styled as "boroughs" ) as having a cross border element that does not exist. And the chancery division of the high court (English Law equity court ) completely ignoring any wrong doing as without merit.

Yours faithfully,

Deb Williams

HL FOI & Information Compliance, House of Lords

Dear Ms Williams,

 

I am writing further to your email to the House of Lords.

 

I note that you sent the same email to the House of Commons and that it
has already referred you to the Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848)
Regulations 2017 and the Explanatory Memorandum published with these
Regulations which are published and available to you from the Government’s
website [1]www.legislation.gov.uk :

 

[2]https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017...

 

[3]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/...

 

We have nothing further to add to the response you have received from the
House of Commons.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Frances Grey

Information Compliance Team

House of Lords

 

From: Deb Williams [[4]mailto:[FOI #472447 email]]
Sent: 20 March 2018 21:48
To: HL External Communications Office <[5][email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - The Insolvency Amendment (EU
2015/848) Regulations 2017 - not laid before parliament 21 days beforehand
as is convention

 

Dear House of Lords,

The Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848) Regulations 2017 - not laid before
parliament 21 days beforehand as is convention

The Insolvency Amendment (EU 2015/848) Regulations 2017 were not laid
before parliament 21 days beforehand as is convention what gives these
amendment regulations force or effect ?

Especially, when private individuals are being made bankrupt unlawful
without due process of law and deputy district judges within the (local)
county court that now covers the whole of England and Wales are satisfied
that the EC/EU regulation does apply under Artice 3 as main proceeding and
are thereby treating "customers who are not businesses" of district
council billing authorites ( also sometimes now re-styled as "boroughs" )
as having a cross border element that does not exist. And the chancery
division of the high court (English Law equity court ) completely ignoring
any wrong doing as without merit.

Yours faithfully,

Deb Williams

UK Parliament Disclaimer: This e-mail is confidential to the intended
recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and
delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying
is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no
liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by
this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and
should not be used for sensitive data.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/
2. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017...
3. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/...
4. mailto:[FOI #472447 email]
5. mailto:[email address]

Dear House of Lords HL FOI &amp; Information Compliance,

Thank you for the explanatory memorandum confirming " the recast EU Insolvency Regulation" introduced new procedures for undertakings as an alternative to secondary proceedings and for the coordination of proceedings involving members of a group of COMPANIES.

I am glad to hear that this civil code regulation will not impact upon unalienable rights in law.

Yours sincerely,

Deb Williams