The sub judice rule
MPs should not raise matters in debates, questions and motions which are awaiting adjudication in a court of law to avoid influencing the outcome of those court proceedings.
‘Sub judice’ is a Latin term that literally translates as ‘under a judge’.
The sub judice rule in the House of Commons provides that MPs should not refer, in debates, questions and motions, to matters awaiting adjudication in a court of law. This is to avoid influencing the outcome of those court proceedings. The rule may be relaxed at the Speaker’s discretion, and it need not prevent the consideration of legislation.
The wording of the House’s sub judice rule was last revised on 15 November 2001, following a review of parliamentary privilege by a joint committee in the previous Parliament. In May 2025, the Speaker asked the Procedure Committee to review the operation of the sub judice rule in the House of Commons.
Previously, the sub judice rule had been formalised by a resolution in 1963 and amended in 1972.
Procedure Committee reviews of the sub judice rule 2025 reviewOn 21 January 2025, the Speaker of the House of Commons, Lindsay Hoyle, said that he was going “to ensure that the House’s sub judice resolution is reviewed to ensure it is fit for purpose”.
On 22 May 2025, the Procedure Committee announced that the Speaker had requested it to undertake the review of the sub judice rule, and it issued a call for evidence.
Reviews since the 2001 rule changeSince 2001, the Procedure Committee has conducted two reviews of the sub judice rule.
In April 2005, the Procedure Committee published a report on The Sub Judice Rule of the House of Commons. The committee considered whether a rule change was necessary after some MPs expressed disquiet about being prevented from discussing some issues in the House because of the rule. The committee believed that no change to the rule was necessary and that the House should continue to rely on the Speaker’s discretion to waive the rule.
In August 2006, the Procedure Committee published a report on the application of the sub judice rule to proceedings in coroners’ courts. It concluded that coroners’ courts should remain within the scope of the House’s sub judice rule but believed that the Speaker could use their discretion to allow debates on policy matters relating to ongoing inquests more frequently. The committee also recommended giving the Speaker the power to direct an MP to resume their seat if they overstepped the agreed mark in relation to sub judice matters. On 1 November 2006, the House approved the Procedure Committee’s report and agreed to a new standing order giving the Speaker the power to order an MP to resume their seat.
The sub judice ruleThe full text of the sub judice rule agreed on 15 November 2001 is reproduced in Appendix 1.
The UK’s three devolved legislatures all have sub judice rules in their standing orders:
- Scottish Parliament, Standing Orders of the Scottish Parliament 6th Edition 10th Revision 2 July 2024, Rule 7.5
- Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament, Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament (PDF), September 2024, page 59 and page 69
- Northern Ireland Assembly, Standing Orders, November 2024, SO No 73