Sovereign immunity, a centuries-old doctrine, dictates that the monarch cannot be prosecuted or subject to civil legal action. Its origins lie in medieval concepts that the monarch, as the source of justice, can do no wrong, and that the courts belong to the Queen, so she cannot be compelled to appear in them. Since at least 1800, the monarch has had a legally distinct private persona, but sovereign immunity typically applies to both public and private identities.
Crown application, a related concept unique to Westminster law, holds that British law does not apply to the Crown unless expressly written to do so. The Crown encompasses the government, the monarchy, and various estates. In 2017, the Supreme Court upheld this rule, noting its ubiquity in British law. Critics, however, have decried its vagueness and tendency to discourage proper parliamentary consideration of how new laws affect the government.
Buckingham Palace has acknowledged discussions with the government during legislative drafting to determine how bills apply to the Queen as a private citizen. The Queen's communications secretary, Donal McCabe, stated that the royal household can be consulted on technical accuracy to ensure consistency, not to dictate policy. Despite this, documents reveal that the Queen's private solicitor has demanded changes to laws, such as inserting a clause to hide 'embarrassing' private wealth from a corporate transparency bill.
A review by The Guardian identified 160 exemptions written into law, suggesting two major changes: first, sovereign immunity is now being explicitly codified in statute, extending to private interests; second, immunity is being applied to the Queen's private assets and investments, such as Sandringham and Balmoral. This development strengthens the principle, implying that certain illegal behaviour becomes permissible if carried out by the monarch.
