UK Bill of Rights 1689 & Parliamentary Sovereignty Guide 2026

A detailed statutory, constitutional, and judicial analysis of the Bill of Rights 1689—an important part of the 1688–89 constitutional settlement that limited Crown power, affirmed parliamentary rights and helped shape modern constitutional government.

Historical Context & Constitutional Settlement

Passed as part of the 1688–89 constitutional settlement, the Bill of Rights 1689 (1 Will. & Mar. sess. 2 c. 2) confirmed the accession of William III and Mary II and imposed important legal limits on Crown power. It declared the pretended powers of the Crown to suspend or dispense with laws illegal, declared taxation by prerogative without parliamentary grant illegal, affirmed free elections to Parliament, and protected parliamentary freedom of speech and proceedings.

Article 9: Freedom of Speech in Proceedings in Parliament

Article 9 states: 'That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.' Parliamentary privilege protects freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament. The protection is not limited to MPs and Peers where other participants are engaged in protected parliamentary proceedings. In limited circumstances under Pepper v Hart [1993] AC 593, courts may use ministerial statements in Parliament when construing ambiguous or obscure primary legislation.

Article 4: Parliamentary Control of Crown Taxation

Article 4 declares it illegal to levy money for the Crown by pretence of prerogative without a grant of Parliament, or contrary to the terms of that grant. The provision is directed at taxation by prerogative and forms part of the constitutional principle that taxation requires parliamentary authority. Modern taxation, Supply, Appropriation and Treasury arrangements are governed by a wider body of constitutional and statutory law.

Key Statutory Articles of the 1689 Act

Article 4 (Levying Money Illegal): No tax or levy can be imposed by prerogative without parliamentary grant. Article 5 (Right to Petition): Protects the right of subjects to petition the King. Article 8 (Free Elections): Elections of Members of Parliament ought to be free. Article 9 (Freedom of Speech): Proceedings in Parliament cannot be questioned in outside courts. Article 10 (Cruel & Unusual Punishment): Excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments ought not to be inflicted.

Modern Case Law: Miller I & Miller II Supreme Court Judgments

In R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5 (Miller I), the Supreme Court held that Ministers could not use prerogative power to trigger Article 50 where doing so would alter domestic law and statutory rights without parliamentary authorisation. In R (Miller) v The Prime Minister [2019] UKSC 41 (Miller II), the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Prime Minister's advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it prevented Parliament from carrying out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification. The Court separately considered Article 9 and held that prorogation itself was not a proceeding in Parliament protected by Article 9.

Key Takeaways

Enacted as part of the 1688–89 constitutional settlement confirming the accession of William III and Mary II.
Article 9 protects freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament from being questioned in courts or places outside Parliament.
Article 4 establishes that levying money for the Crown by pretence of prerogative without a parliamentary grant is illegal.
Pepper v Hart [1993] AC 593 permits judicial reference to Hansard ministerial statements in limited circumstances when interpreting ambiguous legislation.
Miller I [2017] UKSC 5 and Miller II [2019] UKSC 41 confirmed that prerogative powers cannot alter statutory rights or frustrate parliamentary scrutiny without parliamentary authorization.

Frequently Asked Questions (6 Interlinked FAQs)

The Bill of Rights was enacted in December 1689 as part of the constitutional settlement following the Glorious Revolution. It confirmed limits on Crown power, affirmed parliamentary rights and liberties, and helped lay the foundations for the later development of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary sovereignty.

Article 9 protects freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament from being impeached or questioned in courts or places outside Parliament. Its scope depends on whether the conduct falls within protected proceedings in Parliament.

No. Parliamentary privilege can extend to other participants in parliamentary proceedings, including witnesses before select committees, where the relevant conduct falls within protected proceedings.

Pepper v Hart [1993] AC 593 established that, where primary legislation is ambiguous or obscure and the other conditions are satisfied, courts may refer to statements made in Parliament by Ministers or other promoters of a Bill when interpreting the legislation.

Miller I [2017] UKSC 5 held that prerogative power could not be used to trigger Article 50 where that would alter domestic law and statutory rights without parliamentary authorisation. Miller II [2019] UKSC 41 concerned the legal limits of prorogation; the Supreme Court held the advice was unlawful and also held that the prorogation itself was not a proceeding in Parliament protected by Article 9.

Article 4 declares illegal the levying of money for or to the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative without a parliamentary grant, or contrary to the terms of that grant. Modern taxation and public-finance rules arise from a much wider body of constitutional and statutory law.