Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd [1995] 1 AC 321

Court: Privy Council

Facts: Prebble, an MP, sued a TV company for libel after it broadcast allegations of corruption. Prebble attempted to use evidence from Parliamentary proceedings to support his claim, raising questions about the scope of Parliamentary privilege.

Issue: Can Parliamentary proceedings be used as evidence in court, particularly in libel actions?

Held: The Privy Council held that Parliamentary privilege under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 prevented the use of evidence from Parliamentary proceedings in court, even when the MP himself wanted to use it. However, the appeal was allowed because the majority of the evidence in the case did not derive from Parliamentary proceedings.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Browne-Wilkinson stressed that Parliamentary privilege protects not only MPs but also the integrity of Parliament. Using Parliamentary proceedings as evidence in court would undermine this principle.

💡Leveluplaw: Parliamentary privilege shields MPs from having their words in Parliament used against them in court, maintaining the separation of Parliament and judiciary.