Premium Only Content

The English Bill of Rights 1688 (Constitutional) used in court 2017 - by a judge
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/1949.html
31. Finally, in respect of the law, it is also important to note that what the parents seek to do in compiling their online petition is to obtain redress from Parliament or the Government or both regarding a personal grievance by way of petition.
32. The right of the subject to petition the Crown for redress for personal grievances was recognised in Magna Carta (although it probably dates to the Anglo-Saxon monarchs of England) and, more explicitly, in an Act of 1406 (Rotuli Paliamentorium 7 & 8 Hen. IV, No 63). The Bill of Rights of 1689 (1 William & Mary, session 2, cap 2) restated the right to petition the Crown, and the protection afforded to that right, in clear and unambiguous terms, stipulating that "…it is the right of the subjects to petition the King, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal." The Bill of Rights continues to apply in England and Wales. The right of the citizen to petition Parliament or the Government in respect of a personal grievance has thus been, and remains a fundamental constitutional principle (within the context of the right to Petition the European Parliament under Art 44 of the European Charter of Fundamental rights, the right to petition has been described as a fundamental right (see C-261/13 P Schönberger v Parliament)). Within this context, the House of Commons has a comprehensive body of rules that make provision for the submission of public petitions (see HC Standing Orders (Public Business) (2009)).
33.I did not hear detailed submissions on the operation of the Bill of Rights in this case and, specifically, on the effect (if any) of the prohibition it contains on "commitments and prosecutions" with respect to petitions seeking redress. Given the answer produced by the balancing exercise in respect of the ECHR rights engaged in this case, it has not been necessary to consider the point further. However, in a case where the balancing exercise were to come down in favour of injuncting a parent from circulating online a petition aimed at seeking redress from Parliament, it may well be necessary to go on to consider whether the fact that "all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal" under the Bill of Rights of 1689 renders such a course unlawful.
-
1:43:25
The Full English Show
10 days ago5 million dollars each - to live and work in the USA - oh to be wealthy
2.96K33 -
LIVE
The Big Migâ„¢
12 hours agoAnother Trump Assassination Attempt ?
2,631 watching -
LIVE
Bannons War Room
20 days agoWarRoom Live
22,941 watching -
45:55
BonginoReport
4 hours agoTulsi was Right: Christians Murdered in Syria (Ep.156) - 03/10/2025
103K149 -
1:14:35
Dear America
13 hours agoIs Trump’s, JD Vance’s Life In DANGER? + Trudeau RESIGNS as Canada’s PM, Names Successor!
81.8K19 -
Wendy Bell Radio
6 hours agoDemocrats Have Lost Their Minds
69.4K38 -
4:11:06
The Pete Santilli Show
17 hours agoCIA Documents Implicate The Soros’ As Ukraine War Criminals. Putin Agrees [EP 4467-8AM]
43.9K7 -
1:55:20
TheDozenPodcast
22 hours agoPrison Officer EXPOSES deaths in custody: Sam Samworth
34.1K3 -
25:23
Fit'n Fire
22 hours ago $2.57 earnedThe Krink at Home Part 2 - PSA 300 Blackout Krink vs PSA 5.56 Krink
36.9K4 -
1:01:29
PMG
20 hours ago $4.35 earnedTrump's Speech, SCOTUS Forces USAID Payments, and Justice For MRNA Vaccine Victims
31.7K7