Hoffmann-La Roche v Trade Sec., [1975] AC 295

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

PharmaCorp Solutions, a leading biotechnology firm, recently patented a novel treatment for managing chronic pain. In response to concerns about the market price of this therapy, the Minister for Healthcare declared her intention to freeze the retail cost using executive authority. However, Parliamentary legislation has already established guidelines for controlling medication pricing. PharmaCorp asserts that the minister’s actions conflict with statutory provisions and infringe on their patent rights. A judicial review is initiated to determine whether the government’s use of executive authority is permitted under existing law.


Which of the following is the most accurate statement regarding the conditions under which prerogative powers can be lawfully invoked to regulate prices, given that Parliament has enacted specific legislation on the subject?

Introduction

The Hoffmann-La Roche v Trade and Industry Secretary [1975] AC 295 case, heard by the House of Lords, is important for defining the limits of prerogative powers in the UK’s constitutional framework, particularly in commercial regulation. This ruling set boundaries on the government’s ability to set prices and evaluated how prerogative powers relate to laws passed by Parliament. The case focused on government attempts to regulate prices of patented medicines, raising specific questions about patent rights, public needs, and the historical scope of the Royal Prerogative. The judgment outlines legal rules for the proper use of executive authority in commercial matters.

The Crown’s Prerogative and its Limitations

Traditionally, the Crown exercised broad prerogative powers, enabling action without parliamentary approval in certain areas. However, Hoffmann-La Roche confirmed these powers are limited, especially in commercial matters. The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry claimed the prerogative allowed price controls for public benefit. The House of Lords rejected this, stating prerogative powers cannot override laws made by Parliament. This reinforced parliamentary sovereignty, confirming Parliament’s leading role in creating legislation.

Patented Medicines and Public Interest

The case involved pricing for Librium and Valium, medications produced by Hoffmann-La Roche. The government argued high prices justified using the prerogative. The House of Lords accepted public interest in fair pricing for essential drugs but ruled prerogative powers could not replace existing patent laws. The decision stressed that prerogative powers cannot create new rights or obligations conflicting with statutes, particularly those affecting patent-related property rights.

The Relationship Between Prerogative and Statute

The Hoffmann-La Roche ruling clarified how prerogative powers interact with statutory law. The House of Lords held that where Parliament has passed laws on a specific issue, related prerogative powers are displaced. This ensures executive action follows parliamentary intent, preventing arbitrary governance. The case remains a key reference for judicial reviews upholding the priority of statutory law over residual prerogative authority.

The Effect of Hoffmann-La Roche

The Hoffmann-La Roche decision greatly influenced the interpretation and application of prerogative powers. It set firm boundaries for executive action, prohibiting the Crown from regulating markets via prerogative without clear legal authorization. This strengthened parliamentary oversight of government actions in commerce. Later rulings maintained these principles, further limiting prerogative powers and confirming Parliament’s central role. The case remains a core administrative law authority, guiding limits on executive power in commercial contexts.

Judicial Review and Administrative Law Rules

Hoffmann-La Roche demonstrates how judicial review ensures government compliance with legal standards. The House of Lords’ examination of prerogative powers showed courts’ commitment to lawful governance. The case shaped administrative law rules on controlling executive discretion. Standards set here, including the need for legal authority in commercial regulation, remain essential for holding government accountable. The decision confirmed courts’ power to restrain excessive executive action and protect individual rights.

Conclusion

The Hoffmann-La Roche v Trade and Industry Secretary [1975] AC 295 ruling provides a clear structure for limiting prerogative powers in commercial regulation. The House of Lords ruled prerogative powers cannot override statutory systems established by Parliament. This reaffirmation of parliamentary sovereignty restricts executive discretion, ensuring government actions follow legal requirements. The case’s principles continue to influence administrative law and judicial review, preventing overreach and maintaining rights within legal boundaries. It stands as a key authority, emphasizing the necessity of legislative approval for commercial intervention and the superiority of statutory law over residual prerogative powers.

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.

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 December 2024. 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.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

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