ECJ Member of the European Parliament – Article 8 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities – Scope of the concept of’opinion expressed in the exercise of parliamentary duties’ – Criminal proceedings for the crime of false accusation – Immunity material – a behavior MEP outside the precincts of Parliament – link organic.
While Article 8 is intended to apply to statements made by MEPs within the very precincts of the European Parliament, it is not impossible that a statement made by an MEP outside the precincts may amount to an opinion expressed in the performance of their duties within Art 8 because this depends on the character and content of the opinion rather than the place where it was made. However there must be a ‘direct and obvious connection between the opinion expressed and the parliamentary duties and a statement made outside the precincts of the Parliament: ‘does not constitute an opinion expressed in the performance of his parliamentary duties covered by the immunity afforded by that provision unless that statement amounts to a subjective appraisal having a direct, obvious connection with the performance of those duties . .’
[2012] 1 CMLR 11, C-163/10, [2011] EUECJ C-163/10
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Barron and Others v Collins QBD 16-May-2016
The defendant MEP sought an order staying the defamation action brought against her by four MPs from the Rotherham area. She said that as an MEP she had a procedural immunity. She had informed the European Commission that she sought the protection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.440760