header-logo header-logo

13 March 2026 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 8153 / Categories: Features , Profession , Public , Fraud
printer mail-detail

Notes on two scandals

244382
Simon Parsons examines the cases of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor & Peter Mandelson: do they pass the misconduct test?
  • Although the offence of misconduct in a public office could apply to Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor, proving it beyond reasonable doubt may be difficult.

The crime of misconduct in a public office is a common law offence with a maximum punishment of life imprisonment. Its history dates back to the 13th century. However, it is not necessary to look beyond R v Bembridge (1783) 3 Doug KB 327, where Lord Mansfield CJ’s judgment defined the crime as: ‘[A] man accepting an office of trust, concerning the public, especially if attended with profit, is answerable criminally to the King for misbehaviour in his office; this is true by whomever and in whatever way the officer is appointed.’

The phrase ‘misbehaviour in his office’ shows that this common law offence covers many kinds of misconduct and is difficult to precisely define and apply. The essence of the offence is where a person, having a public

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

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin

Boodle Hatfield welcomes new employment partner, Tom McLaughlin

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov

National specialist pensions law firm strengthens team with three new appointments

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit—Christian Abletshauser

Jurit appoints Christian Abletshauser to lead family law practice

NEWS
Burges Salmon appoints Benn Richards to strengthen Contentious Insolvency offering
A High Court decision has clarified that a home may be unfit for human habitation not only where conditions endanger health or safety, but also where they seriously undermine comfort and convenience

A longer time limit for employment tribunal claims, new charity law thresholds, property tribunal recruitment and appellate guidance on small-claims costs feature in the latest Civil Way round-up

A recent High Court ruling could make issue estoppel considerably more complex in cross-border litigation, requiring parties to consider the foreign law governing the underlying claim
The Supreme Court has overturned Cheshire West’s bright-line test for deprivation of liberty, replacing it with a broader, more contextual assessment that gives greater weight to an individual’s wishes, feelings and apparent consent
back-to-top-scroll