The day started at 14.30 GMT with questions to the communities and local government ministerial team.
There was an urgent question on the European Union surcharge, repeated in the House of Lords by Lord Deighton.
MPs approved the opt-in of several EU justice measures after a failed Labour attempt to abandon debate following a row over the government's handling of the vote.
The adjournment debate was on the death of David Efemena, led by Labour MP Jon Cruddas.
Questions in the Lords, at 14.30 GMT, included the topics of mental health of asylum seekers, and resources for the Olympic and Paralympic teams in 2016.
Following that, peers will debated the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill at third reading.
The Infrastructure Bill completed its report stage in the House of Lords.
By Pippa Simm and Sam Francis
All times stated are UK
And that's it. Business in the House of Lords comes to an end as the Infrastructure Bill completes its report stage in the House of Lords. The bill will now progress to Third Reading, its final stage in the Lords before passing to the House of Commons.
The Lords will return tomorrow at 12.00 GMT when the main business will be the report stage of the Wales bill.
Energy and Climate Change Minister Baroness Verma warns that Baroness Worthington's amendment could lead to coal plants closing prematurely, resulting in avoidable increased costs to the consumer.
Baroness Worthington withdraws her amendment.
Shadow energy minister Baroness Worthington tells peers that a perverse effect of the government's energy market reforms is leading to investment in old coal, which works against government targets to lower carbon emissions.
To combat this, she tables an amendment to introduce new powers to limit the operating hours of old coal.
Coal stations are old, inefficient and highly polluting and if they are not phased out "we will simply see ourselves running to a stand still" as greater carbon reduction measures are introduced to offset their pollution, she warns.
Lord Deighton tells peers that the amendment is unnecessary as protecting the consumer is already enshrined in the statutory requirements of regulators such as Ofgem and Ofwat, which he calls a tried and tested successful system.
Focus should be put on ensuring regulators deliver on their mandate rather than legislating for the government to take on overlapping responsibilities for protecting consumers, he argues.
Following Lord Deighton's comments Lord Jenkin withdraws the amendment.
Adding Labour's support for the amendment shadow treasury minister Lord Davies of Oldham tells peers there is a need to ensure that infrastructure costs are not unfairly passed on to the consumers adding that costs to consumers are already rising "very significantly".
A report on the impact of infrastructure spending on consumer bills would help the government to monitor and make changes where necessary, he argues.
Peers are now debating an amendment tabled by Conservative peer Lord Jenkin of Roding which would require the government to produce a report on the impact of infrastructure spending on costs for consumers bills.
Lord Hodgson withdraws his amendment but says he will be following developments closely, hinting that the issue may be returned to in the future.
End of Commons Business
The adjournment debate has finished, after a reply from government minister Anna Soubry.
That brings today's business in the House of Commons to a close.
MPs will be back at noon tomorrow for the last day of sitting before the mini recess.
Do stay with us tonight though, as we continue to bring you live coverage of the House of Lords, where peers are examining the government's Infrastructure Bill.
Treasury Minster Lord Deighton says the government "wants to explore" creating a sovereign wealth fund, but only when the levels of revenue from shale gas are well known.
Lord Deighton points out that Norway didn't set up their own sovereign wealth fund until 20 years after first discovering oil.
Paying off the debt
Conservative peer Lord Forsyth of Drumlean says that peers supporting the creation of a sovereign wealth fund "seem to have forgotten about" the national debt.
The UK's first steps should be to pay back the debt they have accumulated, he says.
Setting up a sovereign wealth fund while the UK needs to pay off its debt would be akin to asking for a loan and a savings account to hold the loan, from a bank managers, Lord Forsyth argues.
Labour peer Lord Whitty, who has put his name to the amendment, tells peers that he argued for a similar measure to be introduced - which was ultimately ignored - when the UK discovered oil in the North Sea.
As a result the government did not use the money from North Sea oil for the long term benefit of the UK's economy, when "perhaps it should should done", he argues.
Lord Whitty warns against "making the same mistake" with shale gas and urges the government to "take a lesson from our Norwegian cousins".
What is an adjournment debate?
Adjournment debates are short debates held at the end of a day's business in the Commons.
They are used to bring constituency matters to the attention of government ministers.
Labour MP Jon Cruddas now has the floor, to lead an adjournment debate on the death of his constituent, David Efemena.
Attention turns to the remaining orders of the day, which includes the presentation of two petitions: on immigration checks in the UK, by Labour MP Tom Greatrex and on planning application in Bozeat, by Tory Peter Bone.
Lords debate on revenue
Conservative peer Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts tables an amendment to establish a Norwegian style sovereign wealth fund to receive and deploy revenue from the extraction and sale of shale gas in the UK.
For the last 20 years Norway has invested the income from its oil and gas reserves and now has what many consider to be the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, estimated to be worth $1tr (£0.6tr) by 2020.
The fund generates between £20bn and £25bn every year after investing nearly all its money in equities and bonds with a tiny allocation to property.
Under the plans, 50% of any revenue received by the United Kingdom government from shale gas will go straight into the fund, which will be deployed to serve "long term public objectives other than those connected with monetary and exchange rate policy".
Tabling the motion Lord Hodgson calls on peers to "put aside" funds from the countries finite resources in order to help the country plan for the future and withstand financial shocks.
Massive majority for the not #EAW motion.... But we've not heard the last of this.
The results are in and, as expected, the government has won the vote comfortably - by a majority of 426.
MPs decided by 464 to 38 to support the decision to rejoin a number of EU justice measures.
That brings the debate in the Commons to an end - but expect the row over the handling of the vote to continue outside of these walls.
MPs filing through the lobbies
MPs make their way to vote on a motion which asks the House to approve government plans to opt-in to a package of EU justice measures.
A cross-section of MPs have complained that the European Arrest Warrant is not mentioned in the raft of measures that they are voting on, which has prompted today's furious row and the attempt to scupper the debate.
A small rebellion is expected by some Conservative MPs who do not want to re-join the arrest warrant.
BBC parliamentary correspondent
The BBC's Susan Hulme explains:
MPs now voting on the European criminal justice measures the government wants to opt back into, after the debate was curtailed by Labour.
Labour, and many Conservative MPs, are unhappy that the European Arrest Warrant is not mentioned in the raft of measures they're voting on - but Labour will back the government in this vote.
There are likely to be some Conservative rebels in this vote.
Expect vicious blame game about today's events. Is Chief Whip, Home Sec, or Mr Speaker villain of the piece?
Govt wins comfortably but will pay heavy price with own MPs for trying to railroad them & not giving them a vote on Euro arrest warrant
"Division, clear the lobbies," shouts the Speaker, as the third vote of the evening is called - and MPs make their way out of the chamber to register their vote.
The measures being voted on have both Labour and Lib Dem support, so they are likely to be approved despite an expected rebellion by some Conservative MPs.
So onto a vote on the 10 EU crime and justice powers in the motion...no suspense 'cos Lab backing Govt...and then, that's all folks.
And while MPs vote again...the Lords continue discussion
Lord Whitty withdraws his amendment but says the government's position is "still not reassuring".
After a short debate, peers pass a group of government amendments which would open up the government's Renewable Heat Incentives to allow alternative providers to run the scheme.
The new scheme will pay participants that generate and use renewable energy to heat their buildings. It is currently regulated by Ofgem.
The amendments were passed without a vote.
MPs vote against Labour move
The government has seen off a Labour-led attempt to abandon the debate on regulations relating to the EU policing and justice measures opt-in.
MPs voted by 272 to 229 - majority 43 - against Labour's move.
The House will now vote on the measures listed in the motion, which shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper says Labour will support.
But she demands a debate on the remaining measures not listed in the motion - including the arrest warrant - tomorrow.
BBC parliamentary correspondent
The BBC's Susan Hulme explains:
MPs are now voting on whether to consider the criminal justice motion from the home secretary any further tonight. Labour, and MPs from the government side too, are unhappy that her motion makes no specific mention of the European Arrest Warrant.
Labour have used a little-known parliamentary procedure to try to torpedo the debate, and force the government to bring forward a new motion on another day.
If Labour win this procedural vote (the ayes win) the debate ends, and there's no further vote. The government would have to bring the measures forward another time.
If Labour lose (the noes win) the debate still ends, but there is immediately a vote on the criminal justice measures.
David Cameron back in Westminster
The prime minister has returned to the Commons for the vote.
So what is fracking? Lords debate
Fracking is the process of drilling down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside. Water, sand and chemicals are injected into the rock at high pressure which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well.
The process is carried out vertically or, more commonly, by drilling horizontally to the rock layer. The process can create new pathways to release gas or can be used to extend existing channels.
The extensive use of fracking in the US, where it has revolutionised the energy industry, has prompted environmental concerns.
The first is that fracking uses huge amounts of water that must be transported to the fracking site, at significant environmental cost. The second is the worry that potentially carcinogenic chemicals used may escape and contaminate groundwater around the fracking site. The industry suggests pollution incidents are the results of bad practice, rather than an inherently risky technique.
There are also worries that the fracking process can cause small earth tremors. Two small earthquakes of 1.5 and 2.2 magnitude hit the Blackpool area in 2011 following fracking.
Lords debating fracking
Responding to the amendment by Baroness Verma says that she must stress that there is already of guidance in place addressing Lord Whitty's concerns.
She says current controls and regulations, built up over 50 years of on shore oil and gas extraction in the UK, already "prevent water contamination, mitigate seismic activity and minimise emissions".
Meanwhile...in the Lords
Peers are debating a motion tabled by Lord Whitty require fracking firms to contribute to a contingency fund to pay for any loss caused directly or indirectly by the extraction of oil and gas.
Compensation for accidents and damages caused by other forms of energy production have almost always been paid by the tax payer until now, Lord Whitty says.
Even with "world class regulation" and "world class regulators" Lord Whitty says that if fracking takes off then there will be problems on hundreds of sites across Britain. There never has been a form of energy where there haven't been "accidents and leakages" he adds.
MPs are now voting on whether or not to abandon today's vote on the regulations relating to the EU justice measures opt-in.
The vote will take about 15 minutes, as MPs must file one by one through the voting lobbies situated just outside the chamber.
There must always be four 'tellers' for each division - two in favour, two against - who then announce the result to the House.
Addressing MPs, Speaker John Bercow restates what the effect of the procedural motion will be.
If agreed, the debate on the draft regulations introduced by the government will cease immediately and the business will be lost.
If rejected, there will be a vote on the regulations straight away without further debate.
He also counsels that the House would be able to debate EU policing and justice matters tomorrow via an emergency business motion, if such a decision is taken.
Full debate on another day?
Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg commends the shadow home secretary's motion, which he argues would allow for a full debate another day on the 35 justice measures the government wants to re-join, including the European Arrest Warrant, after it exercised its block opt-out.
But senior Tory David Davis does not agree - and says there is no guarantee of a full and proper debate if the opposition motion is approved. He says Labour's "anti-democratic" proposal denies many MPs the chance to discuss the government's proposals.
Mr Davis, the Haltemprice and Howden MP, does not support the arrest warrant.
MPs debating move to close debate
MPs were due to vote on the motion on regulations pertaining to the opt-in of 35 EU policing and justice measures at 22.00 GMT.
However, Labour's procedural attempt to stop further debate on the measures, which caught everyone by surprise, means a vote will be held earlier.
MPs have the opportunity to speak for or against the move - and are doing so at the moment.
A number of Conservatives are making lengthy speeches. It suggests that they could be seeking to stall for time to ensure MPs can make their way back to Westminster in time for the vote.
Speaker John Bercow says he is open to a closure motion - which would bring the debate to an end and pave the way for a vote - but after a "reasonable interval".
He says he wants to see whether any more MPs are wishing to speak.
The scene in the Commons
Lib Dem MP's view
Martin Horwood, the Lib Dem MP for Cheltenham, indicates that he will not support Labour in a vote to curtail the debate.
Are #HoC speeches designed to delay 'question not be put' vote long enough for @David_Cameron & Chris Grayling to return from Mansion House?
PA's James Tapsfield tweets: PM on his feet at Lord Mayor's Banquet. He's not going to make it to vote against Labour procedural manoeuvre
'Never heard before'
Ken Clarke says he has never heard a frontbench spokesman invoke the procedure that "the question be not now put" at "any stage in any serious debate", and adds: "I don't expect I will for many years to come."