ChatterBank2 mins ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by matt66. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.For a v long time they were immune from suit because erm basically the govt was the Crown and you couldnt sue them
This changed with the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 which said you could. Cases for negligence followed soon after.
Do you remember Burma Oil ?
Well in 1964 - I remember the case in real time - they announced they were gonna screw the Wilson govt for the loss of oil fields in 1941. No honestly, and the reason was that they were not Act of War (=immune) but defensive acts by HMG to prevent the japanese benefitting (=not an act of war and thus not immune from suit).
and so
Thw Wilson govt passed retroactive leglislation speciifcally exempting oil fields. I came across the Act a few weeks ago.
And so.....what was your original question ?
This changed with the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 which said you could. Cases for negligence followed soon after.
Do you remember Burma Oil ?
Well in 1964 - I remember the case in real time - they announced they were gonna screw the Wilson govt for the loss of oil fields in 1941. No honestly, and the reason was that they were not Act of War (=immune) but defensive acts by HMG to prevent the japanese benefitting (=not an act of war and thus not immune from suit).
and so
Thw Wilson govt passed retroactive leglislation speciifcally exempting oil fields. I came across the Act a few weeks ago.
And so.....what was your original question ?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.