The ease of " De'Keyser's It'oyal Hotel v. The-King,"- in-
which the Court of Appeal on Wednesday decided for the plaintiff, wileranle in the aeries of famous trials in which -English Judges have defended the rights of the'subjeet against the-prerogative of the Crown or State. The minority of the. Court in Hampden 's easeewho -declared that the King could not- tax a -subject arbi- trarily, were Judges of the.aaine independent type- as the Master of the Rolls and LordeJustice Warrington, who held that the Office of Works had no rightqo take De Keyser's Hotta and Ws it as sepublic office without paying for it, under- the -pretence that this was necessary to the defence of the realm. The two Judges pointed out that even Charles I.-made no such claim, and they declined to stretch the' Stuart prerogative for Sir .Alfred Mond. It is obvious that if the State hada legal right to confis- cate one-hotel at the whim of some leepartmental official, no one, rich or poor, would be safe in the possession of his property. The importance of the judgment can hardly be exaggerated.
Previous page
