Attorney General v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd (1920)

Definition

Attorney General v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd (1920) is a landmark case in UK constitutional law that addressed the limits of the royal prerogative, particularly concerning the use of property without compensation. The case arose when the British government requisitioned a hotel during World War I for military purposes without compensating the owner, raising important questions about the scope of the royal prerogative and the legal protections for private property.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The case established that the exercise of the royal prerogative must align with existing laws and cannot violate property rights without proper compensation.
2. The ruling indicated that even in times of war, the government must adhere to legal frameworks that protect private property interests.
3. This case clarified that the royal prerogative is not absolute and that parliamentary legislation may limit its exercise.
4. The decision highlighted the importance of judicial review in assessing governmental actions regarding property rights.
5. The case has had lasting implications for how governments approach requisitioning private property, emphasizing the need for legal justification and compensation.

Review Questions

• How did Attorney General v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd (1920) impact the understanding of the royal prerogative?
  • The case significantly impacted the understanding of the royal prerogative by affirming that it is subject to legal limitations. The court ruled that the government could not use its prerogative powers to seize property without compensating the owner, thereby establishing a precedent that even in emergency situations like war, legal protections for private property must be respected. This ruling emphasized that royal powers cannot override existing laws regarding compensation.
• Discuss the implications of this case for future governmental actions involving requisitioning private property.
  • The implications of this case for future governmental actions are profound, as it set a clear precedent requiring that any requisitioning of private property must be accompanied by fair compensation. This ruling ensures that property rights are upheld and that governments cannot unilaterally disregard legal frameworks under the guise of royal prerogative. As a result, future governments must carefully consider legal justifications when planning similar actions, ensuring compliance with established laws on compensation.
• Evaluate how Attorney General v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd (1920) reflects broader tensions between executive power and individual rights in constitutional law.
  • Attorney General v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd (1920) reflects broader tensions between executive power and individual rights by illustrating the struggle to balance governmental authority during emergencies with protections for personal liberties. The ruling asserted that executive actions should not infringe upon established legal rights without proper justification, highlighting judicial oversight as a critical check on government power. This case underscores ongoing debates within constitutional law about where to draw the line between necessary state actions and safeguarding individual rights against potential governmental overreach.

Related terms

Royal Prerogative: The royal prerogative refers to the ancient powers and privileges originally held by the monarch, which have evolved over time to be exercised by government ministers.

Constitutional Conventions:

Constitutional conventions are unwritten rules that guide political behavior in the UK, influencing how the royal prerogative is exercised in practice.

Compensation Law: Compensation law pertains to legal principles governing the payment or compensation required when private property is taken for public use.