Case of Prohibitions
| Case of Prohibitions | |
|---|---|
.svg) King James I in 1606 | |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
| Citation(s) | [1608] EWHC J23 (KB), (1607) 77 ER 1342, 12 Coke Reports 64, 4 Inst 41 |
| Keywords | |
| Judicial review | |
Case of Prohibitions [1607] EWHC J23 (KB) is a
was confirmed, this case wrested supremacy from the King in favour of the courts.Facts
King
Judgments
When the case went before Edward Coke, the Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, he overturned the decision of the King, and held that cases may be tried only by those with legal training and subject to the rule of law. Coke stated that common law cases were "not to be decided by natural reason but by artificial reason and judgment of law, which law is an art which requires long study and experience":[1]: 21
A controversy of land between parties was heard by the King, and sentence given, which was repealed for this, that it did not belong to the common law: then the King said, that he thought the law was founded upon
Bractonsaith, quod Rex non debed esse sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege [That the King ought not to be under any man but under God and the law.].
In another report, Coke is quoted as saying all causes were "to be measured by the golden and straight met-wand of the law, and not to the incertain and crooked cord of discretion".[2]
See also
- United Kingdom constitutional law – Law that constitutes the body politic of the United Kingdom
- European Union law – System of rules within the European Union
- Dr. Bonham's Case – Case decided in 1610 in England
- Case of Proclamations – 1610 English constitutional law case
Notes
- ^ Strictly, an English constitutional law case as the United Kingdom did not come into existence until 1801, but the precedent continues to be observed in modern UK law.
References
- LexisNexis Butterworths.
- ^ Institutes of the Lawes of England, volume 4, page 41
Sources
- Owen Hood Phillips, Leading Cases in Constitutional Law (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1957) Ch. 13, pp 46–47