Stockdale v. Hansard
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stockdale v. Hansard (1839) 9 Ad & El 1 was a case in which the Parliament of the United Kingdom unsuccessfully challenged the common law of parliamentary privilege, leading to legislative reform.
Contents |
[edit] Background
In 1839, official parliamentary reporter Hansard, by order of the House of Commons, printed and published a report stating that an indecent book published by a Mr. Stockdale was circulating in Newgate Prison. The book was an edition of John Roberton's On Diseases of the Generative System (1811), edited by Thomas Little, a pseudonym of John Joseph Stockdale. Roberton was a radical and something of an outsider to the medical profession while Stockdale was a notorious pornographer and the book had attracted some distaste on its publication for its explicit anatomical plates.[1] Stockdale sued for defamation but Hansard’s defence, that the statement was true, succeeded. On publication of a reprint, Stockdale sued again but Hansard was ordered by the House to plead that he had acted under order of the Commons and was protected by parliamentary privilege.
[edit] Constitutional claim
The Commons claimed that:
- The Commons was a court superior to any court of law;
- Each House (Commons and Lords) was the sole judge of its own privileges;
- A resolution of the House declaratory of its own privileges could not be questioned in any court of law.
The court was led by Lord Denman, who had had some support on the case from barrister Charles Rann Kennedy.[2] The court held that only the Crown in both Houses of Parliament could make or unmake laws and no resolution of one house alone was beyond the control of law. Further, where it was necessary to establish the rights of those outside Parliament, the courts would decide the nature of privilege. The court found that the House held no privilege to order publication of defamatory material outside parliament.[3][4][5] Publication for circulation among Members of Parliament alone is protected by absolute privilege under common law.[6]
In consequence, parliament passed the Parliamentary Papers Act 1840 to establish privilege for publications under the House's authority.
[edit] References
- ^ McGrath (2002)
- ^ Pue, W. W. (1990). "Moral panic at the English Bar: Paternal vs. commercial ideologies of legal practice in the 1860s". Law and Social Inquiry 15(1): 49–118., p.62
- ^ Bradley & Ewing (2003) pp219-220
- ^ Stockdale, E. [1990] Public Law 30
- ^ Ford, P. & G. (eds) (1962). Luke Graves Hansard's Diary 1814-1841. Oxford: Blackwell.
- ^ Lake v. King (1667) 1 Saunders 131
[edit] Bibliography
- Bradley, A.W. & Ewing, K.D. (2003). Constitutional and Administrative Law, 13th ed., London: Pearson, 219-220. ISBN 0582438071.
- Loveland, I. (2000). Political Libels: A Comparative Study. London: Hart Publishing, 21-22. ISBN 1841131156. (Google Books)
- McGrath, R. (2002). Seeing Her Sex: Medical Archives and the Female Body. Manchester: Manchester University Press, Ch.2. ISBN 0719041678. (Google Books)