header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 November 2024 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8093 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Calling time on hereditary peers? (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
196078
Too fast, too slow, too far, not far enough? Neil Parpworth tracks the progress of the Hereditary Peers Bill
  • The piecemeal nature of the Bill failed to strike a chord with some members across the house.
  • The Bill’s perceived lack of ambition was particularly criticised.
  • An opposition backbench MP (Sir Gavin Williamson) expressed his intention to move amendments to the Government’s Bill in order to make it more in tune with the Government’s own manifesto commitments.

As readers will be aware, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 5 September 2024, with the principal aim of making hereditary peers ineligible to continue to sit and vote in the House of Lords (see NLJ, ‘Calling time on hereditary peers’, 11 October 2024, p9). Its target is therefore the 92 excepted hereditary peers who remain active legislators due to a compromise reached to secure the passage of the House of Lords Act 1999. On 15 October 2024, the Bill

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll