Hamilton v Al Fayed (No. 1) [2001]


  • Hamilton made a defamation claim against Al Fayed, a member of Parliament, alleging corruption in accepting money to ask questions in parliament
  • Al Fayed claimed that Parliamentary privileges prevented such a claim being allowed


  • Could evidence from Parliamentary committee discussions be admitted


  • Yes, H’s claim succeeded


  • Although defamation is protected against in Parliament, evidence may still be used to support a claim not protected by Parliamentary privilege
RELATED CASE  Aston Cantlow PCC v Wallbank [2003]

Posted in Public Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 31st January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy