Entick v Carrington

250 Years of the Rule of Law

Edited by: Adam Tomkins, Paul Scott

Now available in paperback! Entick v Carrington is one of the canons of English public law; in 2015, it turned 250 years old. In 1762, the Earl of Halifax, one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, dispatched Nathan Carrington and three others of the King's messengers to John Entick's house in Stepney. They broke into his house, seizing his papers, and causing significant damage. Why? Because he was said to have written seditious papers published in The Monitor. Entick sued Carrington and the other messengers for trespass. The defendants argued that the Earl of Halifax had given them legal authority to act as they had. Lord Camden ruled firmly in Entick's favor, holding that the warrant of a Secretary of State could not render lawful actions such as these which were otherwise unlawful. The case is a canonical statement of the common law's commitment to the constitutional principle of the rule of law. In this collection, leading public lawyers reflect on the history of the case, the enduring importance of the legal principles for which it stands, and the broader implications of Entick v Carrington 250 years on. (Series: Hart Studies in Comparative Public Law, Vol. 9) [Subject: Public Law, Constitutional Law, Rule of Law, Legal History]


Publication Date: 12/28/2017
Format: Paper
ISBN: 9781509918324

Available in other formats