Entick v Carrington (1765) 19 St Tr 1029 (KB)

Facts

  • In 1762, Nathan Carrington, a chief messenger, and three others entered the home of John Entick under the purported authority of a warrant issued by the Earl of Halifax, Secretary of State.
  • The warrant directed the search for and seizure of alleged seditious papers authored by Entick.
  • During the search, Carrington and his associates caused property damage and removed charts and pamphlets from Entick’s home.
  • Entick brought a claim for trespass against Carrington, challenging the lawfulness of the entry and seizure.
  • The court was required to determine whether the Secretary of State’s warrant provided adequate legal justification for the actions taken.

Issues

  1. Whether the Secretary of State’s warrant was sufficient legal authority for Carrington and others to enter Entick’s property and seize materials.
  2. Whether the executive could exercise powers that were not explicitly grounded in statute, precedent, or established legal principles.
  3. Whether actions infringing individual property rights could be justified solely on the basis of government practice or unchallenged custom.

Decision

  • The King’s Bench ruled in favour of Entick, holding that Carrington and his associates had committed trespass.
  • The court found there was no statutory or common law authority to justify the warrant or the government’s actions.
  • Lord Camden asserted that the lawfulness of executive action must be found in established legal sources; absent such authority, the action was not lawful.
  • The court rejected arguments that executive practice or lack of past legal challenge constituted lawful authority.

Legal Principles

  • The state may only act within the bounds of explicit legal authorization derived from statute or common law.
  • Executive power is limited and must be justified with reference to legal rules; government officials cannot exercise authority without a clear legal basis.
  • Individual liberty is protected by restricting state actions to what is specifically permitted by law, while individuals may do anything not expressly forbidden.
  • The protection of private property is a core element, with any entry or seizure by state agents requiring explicit legal justification.
  • The judiciary has a critical role in reviewing and restraining executive actions to prevent abuse of power.

Conclusion

Entick v Carrington is a foundational case affirming that all government power must be authorized by law, decisively limiting executive authority and safeguarding individual rights. Its enduring influence forms a central principle of constitutional law and the doctrine of judicial review.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal