Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench. This case concerned the legality of a warrant issued by one of the King’s Secretaries of State, the Earl of Halifax, which purported to authorize four of the King’s messengers to search for and take Entick’s papers and property. The case is a seminal judgment on the rule of law, the powers of government, and the nature of the legal system. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench
Chapter
14. Torts
A claim for damages for loss caused by a public authority gives a court the opportunity to do justice for the claimant and also to impose the rule of law on the administration. The challenge is to do both without interfering inappropriately in the administrative pursuit of public goods, and without creating public compensation funds that only a legislature can legitimately create. It is an important constitutional principle that liabilities in the law of tort apply to public authorities, just as to private parties. But there is no general liability to compensate for public action that was unlawful; the impugned conduct must meet the standard requirements of the tort liability of private parties, with the exception of the one public tort: misfeasance in a public office. This chapter discusses trespass to property, statutory liabilities, negligence, misfeasance in public office, and damages under the Human Rights Act 1998.
