header-logo header-logo

Parliamentary privilege & the Strasbourg court

30 May 2025 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8118 / Categories: Features , Human rights , Constitutional law , Contempt , EU
printer mail-detail
220713
Neil Parpworth analyses Green v UK, in which the European Court of Human Rights upheld parliamentarians’ protection
  • An examination of the decision in Green v UK [2025] ECHR 91, in which the European Court of Human Rights scrutinised Lord Hain’s naming of Philip Green under parliamentary privilege, in spite of a court injunction.
  • The court upheld the UK’s protection of parliamentary speech, ruling that requiring further controls would undermine the separation of powers and was not supported by European consensus.
  • However, the court acknowledged the seriousness of the case and recommended regular review.

Approximately six and a half years ago, at the conclusion of a debate on an unrelated issue, the former cabinet minister and Labour life peer Lord Peter Hain made a short personal statement in the House of Lords:

‘My Lords, having been contacted by someone intimately involved in the case of a powerful businessman using non-disclosure agreements and substantial payments to conceal the truth about serious and repeated sexual harassment, racist abuse and

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll