« The Digital Library of The Supreme Court Historical Society | Main | "Two Weeks In": thoughts for first-year students »
Sunday, January 27, 2019
Literal Sovereign Immunity
Two weeks ago the Duke of Edinburgh (the Queen's husband) was involved in a car accident and someone in another car was injured. As the Duke is 97 years old, there is some reason to think that he was negligent. Would he be liable, though, if the injured party sued him? Or is he covered by some sort of royal immunity in a "The Queen can do no wrong" sort of way. I don't know. I take it he has auto insurance. Does he get a better rate than another 97 year old driver would? Probably.
Posted by Gerard Magliocca on January 27, 2019 at 10:47 AM | Permalink
Comments
In response to your comment, driving while elderly does not in itself prove negligence. Membership in a high-risk group does not prove negligence, either, otherwise there would be no point in 16 year olds disputing liability when involved in a crash.
Your comment about Prince Philip's insurance rates also strikes me as perhaps unfair. I would expect that few people are driving at age 97, largely because few people are alive at age 97. There is also no reason to think that his insurance rates are particularly low because of his rank. If they are, isn't it more likely to be because he is financially extremely sound than because he is elderly?
Posted by: Ellen Wertheimer | Jan 28, 2019 6:19:53 PM
The Duke of Edinburgh is NOT the king; he was not crowned; he does not carry the scepter. If he is "sovereign" then what about the other two dozen U.K dukes who do not also carry the title of "prince"?
Posted by: John R. Lambert | Jan 28, 2019 10:19:07 AM
That can be a hell of issue.Meanwhile,you can find great interest in that ruling in this regard:
http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs5/19052KB391.html
Thanks
Posted by: El roam | Jan 27, 2019 10:58:10 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.