Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { ?s ?p Attorney-General v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Limited [1920] AC 75 is a case in English law decided by the House of Lords which is the authority for the statement that the royal prerogative is placed in abeyance (is not used) when statute law can provide a legal basis for an action.In this case, owner of a hotel claimed compensation under the 1842 statute for occupation by the armed forces in war time. The government relied on prerogative under which 'less compensation would be payable'. House Of Lords rejected the government to rely on prerogative holding that once the statute had been enacted the prerogative powers fall into abeyance for the duration of the life of the statute should the statute be replaced or amend or modify it. This point was supported by the two following cases, Laker Airway v Dept. of Trade (1977) & R v Secy of State for the Home Dept. exparte Fire Brigades Union & others (1995). }
Showing items 1 to 1 of
1
with 100 items per page.
- Attorney_General_v_De_Keyser's_Royal_Hotel_Ltd abstract "Attorney-General v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Limited [1920] AC 75 is a case in English law decided by the House of Lords which is the authority for the statement that the royal prerogative is placed in abeyance (is not used) when statute law can provide a legal basis for an action.In this case, owner of a hotel claimed compensation under the 1842 statute for occupation by the armed forces in war time. The government relied on prerogative under which 'less compensation would be payable'. House Of Lords rejected the government to rely on prerogative holding that once the statute had been enacted the prerogative powers fall into abeyance for the duration of the life of the statute should the statute be replaced or amend or modify it. This point was supported by the two following cases, Laker Airway v Dept. of Trade (1977) & R v Secy of State for the Home Dept. exparte Fire Brigades Union & others (1995)".