← Back to Bentcop.biz

📁 Investigations Evidence

A compiled research record concerning the Public Petitions to Parliament, 1833–1918 collection, access to OCR text, evidence requests, parliamentary material and the legal points discussed in the supplied ProQuest research.

Compiled from the supplied ProQuest research documents and related discussion. The accompanying text file contains the fuller record of the evidence, statutory and procedural basis discussed, supporting authorities and points requiring verification.

Download the full evidence compilation

The text file brings together the requested collection scope, the OCR-only request, N285/N20 and pre-action disclosure distinctions, parliamentary and copyright points, archive-access questions, and the matters requiring verification.

📄 Download investigations_evidence.txt
Key Legal Findings
1 The Target: One Million Petitions in 100 MB

The ProQuest module "Public Petitions to Parliament, 1833–1918" covers the full records of the Select Committee on Public Petitions — public business of the House of Commons, printed by order of Parliament. The request is for the raw OCR text layer only: not images, not microform, not the ProQuest interface. A typical petition abstract runs 100–150 words. At roughly 900 bytes each, one million records compress to approximately 100–130 MB — smaller than a smartphone video clip. This obliterates any claim of technical burden or excessive cost.

Proportionate, targeted, technically unassailable
2 The 1840 Act: You Are Bulletproof

Every petition published by order of the House of Commons is absolutely protected by the Parliamentary Papers Act 1840. Section 1 requires courts to permanently stay any civil action brought against a person for publishing or copying a paper printed by order of Parliament — no exceptions. Section 2 extends the same shield to true copies. This means:

These are public petitions laid before the House. They are already part of the open constitutional record of the realm.

Absolute privilege — no civil action can stand
3 CDPA 1988: The Parliamentary and Judicial Override

Section 45 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 states in plain terms:

"Copyright is not infringed by anything done for the purposes of parliamentary or judicial proceedings. Copyright is not infringed by anything done for the purposes of reporting such proceedings."

Section 47 protects the copying of material open to public inspection under a statutory requirement. Section 49 allows public records within the meaning of the Public Records Acts to be copied without infringing copyright. The combination of the 1840 Act and CDPA 1988 means that once your purpose is parliamentary or judicial, ProQuest's commercial copyright is legally irrelevant to your use of the material.

Statutory override confirmed across three sections
4 No Court Fees — Public Business Is Pre-Disclosed

In a standard civil dispute you fight for documents, pay the CPR 31.16 application fee (currently £303) and risk an adverse costs order under CPR 46.1. None of that applies here. A public petition submitted under House of Commons Standing Order 153 is already part of the open roll of the realm — it is not private property. Walking into The National Archives at Kew to inspect it costs nothing. There is no court order to seek. You retrieve the public record, make your bulletproof true copy under the 1840 Act, and take it directly into your court or parliamentary bundle.

Civil fee framework bypassed entirely
5 The Affidavit as Pre-Action Lever (Form N285)

Form N285 is sworn before a solicitor or Commissioner for Oaths — the court does not sign it. Swearing an affidavit stating that the OCR text is required for active parliamentary or judicial proceedings formally locks the material into those proceedings under Section 45 CDPA. It then gives ProQuest a documented, sworn pre-action notice. If they refuse after receiving sworn notice and a tender of reasonable costs, that refusal becomes the trigger for a forced CPR 31.16 disclosure application — and the judge will have ProQuest's unreasonable refusal in front of them. Statutory fee to a solicitor for swearing: historically £5 plus £2 per exhibit.

Low cost, high legal weight — the correct first move
6 Erskine May: Obstructing a Petitioner Is Contempt of Parliament

Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice (21st Edition, Chapter 9) sets out the constitutional protection that goes far beyond any civil court:

"Those having business before either House or its committees, as petitioners, counsel, agents and solicitors, are considered as under the protection of the High Court of Parliament, and obstruction of, or interference with such persons in the exercise of their rights or the discharge of their duties, or conduct calculated to deter them or other persons from preferring or prosecuting petitions or bills or from discharging their duties may be treated as a contempt."

If a commercial provider knowingly withholds data from a person who has formally sworn that it constitutes evidence for parliamentary business, that refusal is not merely a contract dispute — it is conduct calculated to obstruct a petitioner. The remedy does not go to the County Court. It goes directly to the Speaker or the relevant Select Committee as a Breach of Parliamentary Privilege. Parliament can summon the directors of the company to the Bar of the House.

Contempt jurisdiction — no civil court fee required
7 The MP: A Superior Constitutional Lever

When an MP countersigns and presents evidence to the House or a Select Committee as part of public business, the document moves from a private text into active parliamentary proceedings. At that point:

The sequence is: MP initial letter → formal email tender to ProQuest → if refused, sworn affidavit at solicitor → if still refused, Breach of Privilege reported to the House.

Parliamentary compulsion — no court needed
8 National Archives: On-Site Access Is Already Free

The National Archives at Kew holds these records. Physical inspection carries no entry fee. The government satisfies its statutory obligation to keep public records "open to public inspection" by providing free terminal access on-site. Once you are physically inside the reading rooms, the blanket institutional licence unlocks the full ProQuest commercial modules at no extra charge. The commercial paywall only operates remotely. FOIA 2000 Section 21 (information reasonably accessible by other means) and Section 34 (parliamentary privilege exemption) further reinforce the public character of these records.

Free on-site access — the commercial wall is a remote-only construction
9 The £10–£15 Marginal Cost Principle

Under UK information law, a body providing data under a statutory or legal obligation can charge only the marginal cost of supply. For a ~100 MB compressed OCR text archive the reasonable itemised cost is:

Total: under £10–£15. Any demand significantly above this level — or a refusal to quote a cost at all — should be challenged in writing, citing FOIA 2000 Section 9 (fees), Section 12 (cost limit of £600 for central government bodies) and Section 13 (fee basis where the limit is exceeded). The legal basis for any charge must be stated by the recipient, not assumed.

£10–£15 marginal cost — demand a legal basis for anything more
10 The Interlocking Shield in Summary
Seven interlocking layers — commercial gatekeeping has no lawful answer to this combination