Retail tycoon Sir Philip Green has lost a high-profile legal case at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), after attempting to challenge the UK’s use of parliamentary privilege following his public naming in the House of Lords over alleged misconduct.
The former Arcadia Group boss, who is now based in Monaco, brought the case in response to comments made by Lord Hain in 2018. The peer used parliamentary privilege to reveal that Green had secured a court injunction preventing The Daily Telegraph from publishing allegations against him — a move Green’s lawyers argued rendered his breach of confidence case against the newspaper “futile”.
Green claimed the lack of safeguards around the use of parliamentary privilege breached his rights to privacy and a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights. But the Strasbourg court rejected his claim, stating that decisions on parliamentary speech should remain a matter for national parliaments.
In its ruling, the ECHR said: “The court found that it should be left to the respondent state, and parliament in particular, to decide on the controls required to prevent parliamentary members from revealing information subject to privacy injunctions.
To find otherwise would run contrary to the principle of the autonomy of parliament, which had already considered and rejected the need for further controls.”
The ruling is seen as a clear endorsement of the UK’s long-standing constitutional protection of parliamentary privilege, which allows MPs and peers to speak freely in Parliament without the risk of legal action.
Lord Hain’s disclosure in the Lords followed a front-page Telegraph story headlined “The British #MeToo scandal which cannot be revealed”, which stated that the paper was prevented from naming a high-profile businessman accused of serious misconduct.
The newspaper later reported allegations that Green had groped a female executive and paid her over £1 million to settle the matter, and that he had made racist comments to a black employee. Green has “categorically and wholly” denied any unlawful sexual or racist behaviour, and previously accused the paper of “pursuing a vendetta”.
In a statement following the ruling, Lord Hain said: “I’m really pleased that the Strasbourg court defended parliamentary privilege and my right to have named Sir Philip.
Instead of resorting to all sorts of specious legal twists and turns, he should start behaving respectfully.”
The court’s decision was delivered as a “chamber judgment”, meaning both parties have three months to request a referral to the grand chamber for a final ruling.
Sir Philip Green has been approached for comment.
Read more:
Sir Philip Green loses legal case against UK over use of parliamentary privilege
