Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Privilege of peerage
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Freedom from arrest == The privilege of freedom from arrest applies to members of both Houses of Parliament,<ref name="so" /> because of the principle that they must, whenever possible, be available to give advice to the Sovereign. Several other nations have copied this provision; the [[Constitution of the United States]], for example, provides, "The Senators and Representatives ... shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses." Theoretically, even when Parliament is not sitting, peers enjoy the privilege because they continue to serve the Sovereign as counsellors. However, peers are free from arrest in civil cases only; arrests in criminal matters are not covered by the privilege. Until 1770, a peer's domestic servants were also covered by the privilege of freedom from arrest in civil matters.<ref>{{Cite journal |author=Turberville, A. S. |date=October 1927 |title=The 'Protection' of Servants of Members of Parliament |journal=[[The English Historical Review]] |publisher=Oxford University Press |volume=42 |pages=590–600 |doi=10.1093/ehr/xlii.clxviii.590}}</ref> Most often the privilege was applied in cases of imprisonment in [[debtors' prison]]s. In 1870, both imprisonment for debt and the privilege in relation to freedom from arrest for bankruptcy were abolished, and as a result, the freedom became extremely limited in practical application. Now, civil proceedings involve arrests only when an individual disobeys a court order. Since 1945, the privilege of freedom from arrest in civil cases has arisen in only two cases: ''[[Stourton v Stourton]]'' (1963) and ''Peden International Transport, Moss Bros, The Rowe Veterinary Group and Barclays Bank plc v [[Benjamin Mancroft, 3rd Baron Mancroft|Lord Mancroft]]'' (1989).<ref name="so" /> In the latter most recent case, the trial judge considered the privilege obsolete and inapplicable, and said in proceedings, "the privilege did not apply—indeed ... it is unthinkable in modern times that, in circumstances such as they are in this case, it should".<ref>Barclays Bank plc v Lord Mancroft and three other cases taken together. Case No. 88/05589 and others, Wandsworth County Court not reported. See {{cite book |url=http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/43ap16.htm |title=Memorandum by Mr Geoffrey Lock |date=9 April 1999 |work=Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege – First Report: Volume 3 Written Evidence |publisher=United Kingdom Parliament |isbn=0-10-432699-9 |access-date=2007-11-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040628004149/http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/43ap16.htm |archive-date=28 June 2004 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)