The Plaintiffs, an English shipping company, carrying on business in Hong Kong, traded in both local and Chinese waters. Its trade consisted both of carrying cargo and passengers. The Chinese and neighbouring waters were infested by pirates who frequently attacked ships trading in those waters, both from within and without the ships, the attacks from within being by evil-disposed persons who came on board – whether at the port of Hong Kong or Chinese ports – ostensibly as ordinary and peaceable passengers but who, on opportunity overpowered the officers and crew and took possession of the ship and all valuables therein. For some time the Government of Hong Kong was prevailed upon by various ship owners, including the Plaintiffs, to provide and place naval and military guards on board. Subsequently, however, Government notffied ship owners that as from a specified date ship owners would be required to pay in full for all guards supplied. The Plaintiff instituted proceedings in England against the Attorney General of England as representative of the Crown, seeking declarations that the Crown had no authority to demand money for providing protection against piracy, the ship owners, as subjects of His Majesty, being entitled to require the Crown to provide the necessary protection without payment. Rowlatt, J, before whom the action first came, dismissed it as misconceived.
Held: The Court of Appeal affirmed that decision. The Crown is under no legal duty to afford military protection to British subjects abroad. If, in the exercise of its discretion, the Crown decides to afford such protection, it may lawfully stipulate that it will do so only on the condition that the cost should be borne by those requiring such extraordinary protection.
The legal history relating to the relationship between servicemen and women and the Crown can be traced back over many centuries, and at least since the reign of Charles II, the government and command of military forces had been vested in the Crown by prerogative right at common law and by statute.
Judges:
Lawrence LJ
Citations:
[1932] 2 KB 197, [1932] All ER 626
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex Parte Northumbria Police Authority CA 18-Nov-1987
The Authority appealed from refusal of judicial review of a circular issued by the respondent as to the supply of Plastic Baton Rounds and CS gas from central resources only. The authority suggested that the circular amounted to permission for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Constitutional, Armed Forces
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.554757