Written question asked by Peter Bottomley (Conservative) on Tuesday, 16 March 1999, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Tuesday, 23 March 1999. It was answered by Ross Cranston (Labour) on Tuesday, 23 March 1999 on behalf of the Solicitor General.

Solicitor-General

Question: To ask Mr Attorney General, what factors underlay the decision of the Solicitor General to intervene in the Hamilton v Al Fayed case.

Answer: Mr. Peter Bottomley: To ask the Attorney-General what factors underlay the decision of the Solicitor General to intervene in the Hamilton v Al Fayed case. [77739] The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General intervened before the Court of Appeal in this case, on behalf of the Speaker and the Authorities of the House of Commons, as it raised fundamental constitutional issues as to the respective jurisdictions of Parliament and the Courts. It was important that such issues should not be decided by default. The Speaker and Authorities of the House of Commons have a direct interest in protecting the privileges of the House, which were directly in issue in the appeal. Before deciding whether to intervene, the Attorney-General took into account the judgment of Mr. Justice Popplewell in the High Court, together with representations made to him following that judgment by the Clerk of the House.

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 77739; 328 c124-5W
Session: 1998-99
Subjects: Administration of justice Al-Fayed, Mohamed Solicitor General Hamilton, Neil