免责声明:本网站不构成法律建议。法律法规和判例法会发生变化。请务必就您的具体情况咨询合格的律师。

所有案例
Administrative & Public Law
Court of Common Pleas
1765

Entick v Carrington

(1765) 19 St Tr 1029

判决理由

The executive cannot interfere with the property or liberty of the individual unless authorised by law. A general warrant issued by the Secretary of State to search premises and seize papers was held to be unlawful.

事实

The Secretary of State issued a warrant authorising the King's messengers to enter the home of John Entick, a writer of political pamphlets, and seize his papers. The warrant was not issued by a court but by executive authority.

判决摘要

Lord Camden CJ held the warrant unlawful. No statutory or common law authority supported the power to issue general warrants. The state could not enter a person's property or seize their belongings without lawful authority. This case established the fundamental principle of the rule of law: the executive must act within the law.

关键引述

"If it is law, it will be found in our books. If it is not to be found there, it is not law."

Lord Camden CJ

后续处理

Followed

A constitutional landmark cited in countless cases on the rule of law, individual liberty, and the limits of executive power.

Related Content