Prerogative writ
Historical writs directing government behavior under royal prerogative.
Prerogative writ is a historical term for a writ (official order) that directs the behavior of another arm of government, such as an agency, official, or other court. It was originally available only to the Crown under English law, and reflected the discretionary prerogative and extraordinary power of the monarch. The term may be considered antiquated, and the traditional six comprising writs are often called the extraordinary writs and described as extraordinary remedies.
- field
- Law
- known_for
- Extraordinary remedies directing government behavior
- jurisdiction
- England and Wales, India, Pakistan, United States
Lore & Background
Six writs are traditionally classified as prerogative writs: certiorari, habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, procedendo, and quo warranto. Additionally, scire facias was once known as a prerogative writ. In England and Wales, the prerogative writs are a means by which the Crown, acting through its courts, effects control over inferior courts or public authorities throughout the kingdom. The writs are issued in the name of the Crown, who is the nominal plaintiff, on behalf of the applicant. The writ of habeas corpus is still known by that name.
Reader's Guide
In India, the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights against any authority of the State, with Article 12 defining 'State' to include government, Parliament, state governments, legislatures, and local or other authorities, including business organisations like LIC. A proceeding under Article 32 is a constitutional remedy and the right to bring such proceedings before the Supreme Court is itself a fundamental right. In Pakistan, Article 199 of the Constitution confers wide powers of judicial review on Provincial High Courts, allowing writs of prohibition, mandamus, certiorari, habeas corpus and quo warranto. In the United States federal court system, issuance of writs is authorized by the All Writs Act, with language left deliberately vague to allow courts flexibility. Use of writs at trial court level has been greatly curtailed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court grants certiorari; mandamus has been replaced in district courts by injunction and is generally available only to federal courts of appeals; prohibition is generally limited to appellate courts.
Did You Know?
- The six traditional prerogative writs are certiorari, habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, procedendo, and quo warranto.
- In England and Wales, the writs of quo warranto and procedendo are now obsolete.
- In India, the right to bring proceedings under Article 32 before the Supreme Court is itself a fundamental right.
- In the United States, the All Writs Act authorizes federal courts to issue writs necessary in aid of their jurisdiction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Prerogative writ?
It is a formal judicial order that compels or restrains the conduct of a government body, public official, or another court. The concept grew out of English law, where it represented the monarch's discretionary authority to direct other branches of the state.
What do Prerogative writs actually do in practice?
They function as extraordinary legal remedies aimed squarely at how public authority behaves, rather than resolving disputes between private parties. A court issues one to force a government actor to act or to stop an unlawful action.
Which legal systems still use Prerogative writs?
The tradition is anchored in England and Wales but has been inherited by the legal frameworks of India, Pakistan, and the United States. In all of these jurisdictions the writs operate as a check on governmental power.
Why are they also called 'extraordinary writs' or 'extraordinary remedies'?
That label reflects their origin as tools of the Crown's special, discretionary prerogative rather than part of routine litigation. Today the six traditional writs are more commonly grouped under the heading 'extraordinary writs' in both textbooks and court practice.
Is the term 'Prerogative writ' still current in legal writing?
Most modern practitioners consider the phrasing somewhat antiquated and prefer to speak of extraordinary writs or extraordinary remedies. The underlying legal mechanisms, however, remain very much alive in common-law courts.
More in Legal Professions 1-24
Elsewhere in the Legal Professions universe
Spotted an error? Know more?
This is a living reference — every entry is fact-audited, and reader corrections feed straight into our audit queue. Suggest an edit · See this site's audit record