Chaytor & Ors, R v

Chaytor & Ors, R v

Parliamentary privilege does not preclude criminal prosecution of MPs and peers for alleged false accounting in expense claims. The submission of such claims is not a 'proceeding in Parliament' within the meaning of Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689. Privilege attaches only to core parliamentary functions, such as freedom of speech and internal legislative processes, not to administrative or ancillary activities like expense claims. Therefore, the criminal courts have jurisdiction to try these offences.

Parties
Prosecution: R; Defendant: David Chaytor; Defendant: Elliot Morley; Defendant: James Devine; Defendant: Lord Hanningfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Preparatory Hearing Ruling
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Parliamentary Privilege, False Accounting, Separation of Powers
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Parliamentary Privilege False Accounting Separation of Powers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

David Chaytor

Defendant

Elliot Morley

Defendant

James Devine

Defendant

Lord Hanningfield

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Preparatory Hearing Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does parliamentary privilege preclude criminal prosecution of MPs and peers for alleged false accounting in expense claims?
  2. 2 Are claims for parliamentary expenses 'proceedings in Parliament' under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689?

Ratio Decidendi

Parliamentary privilege does not preclude criminal prosecution of MPs and peers for alleged false accounting in expense claims. The submission of such claims is not a 'proceeding in Parliament' within the meaning of Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689. Privilege attaches only to core parliamentary functions, such as freedom of speech and internal legislative processes, not to administrative or ancillary activities like expense claims. Therefore, the criminal courts have jurisdiction to try these offences.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The decision of Saunders J is affirmed; criminal proceedings may continue.
  • Reporting restrictions on the appeal proceedings are lifted.