HC Deb 09 February 1971 vol 811 cc98-9W
30. Mr. William Wells

asked the Attorney-General whether, in view of the conflict of judicial opinion in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Australian appeal of Mutual Life and Citizens' Assurance Company Limited v. Evatt, he will consider whether the law should be as stated by the majority or minority of the Board and recommend legislation accordingly; and if he make a statement.

The Attorney-General

The decisions of the Privy Council are not binding in the courts of this country. If they were, the opinion of the majority would prevail. The decision in Evatt's case was based on a demurrer (a proceeding not now available in the civil courts of this country) and therefore on a flaw in the plaintiff's pleading and does not of necessity lay down general principles capable of wide application.

In the opinion of the Government the time is not yet ripe for legislation. The field is a developing one and it would be wiser to leave it to the courts to develop it further in the light of concrete cases and not to legislate piecemeal.

Back to