Former MP Owen Paterson’s case at the European Court of Human Rights has been rejected.

The former North Shropshire MP, who resigned after a lobbying scandal that would have led to a 30-day suspension from Parliament, had his case rejected by the court.

Earlier this summer, Mr Paterson was found to have “carried on the business of consultant lobbying while not being registered” by the lobbying watchdog.

READ MORE: Lobbying watchdog finds against former North Shropshire MP Owen Paterson

Mr Paterson – an ardent Eurosceptic – complained to the European court that his “good reputation” had been damaged by the public finding and the process followed to investigate and consider the allegations against him had “not been ‘fair’ in many basic respects”.

He argued his right to privacy was breached under the European Convention of Human Rights, which he previously said the UK should quit.

But the court unanimously declared his application “inadmissible” in its decision announced on Thursday.

OTHER NEWS:

The UK Government, against which Mr Paterson brought his case, argued it was for “Parliament, and not the courts, to regulate the business of Parliament, including the conduct of Members of Parliament in the discharge of their parliamentary duties”.

The court noted on Mr Paterson: “The applicant argued that he was publicly stated to have been found by a fair process to have engaged in corrupt practices and to have breached the Code of Conduct of Members of Parliament.

“This called into question his character and reputation, and caused him significant personal and financial loss and damage.”

Mr Paterson also highlighted the “great stress” suffered by his family, with the court noting: “His wife committed suicide during the investigation, and while he admitted that he did not know the reason why she took her own life, he believed the ongoing investigation to have been a contributing factor.”

The court said Mr Paterson has “not substantiated his more specific claims of damage to his professional relationships and his consequent financial loss”.

It said: “As he himself resigned from the House of Commons before the House could consider whether or not to apply the recommended sanction, neither the loss of his seat nor the loss of income from his position as an MP were a necessary consequence of the investigation.

“Moreover, he has provided no documentary evidence to substantiate his claims that he lost his consultancy work, and has since been unable to find either paid employment or charitable work, as a direct consequence of the committee’s findings.”

The court said the allegations against Mr Paterson were already in the public domain before the investigation into him began, adding: “It is therefore doubtful that the negative impact on the applicant’s private life caused by the investigation and its published findings alone reached the minimum level of severity required for Article 8 to be applicable.”

Help support trusted local news

Sign up for a digital subscription now: www.bordercountiesadvertizer.co.uk/subscribe/

As a digital subscriber you will get

  • Unlimited access to the Oswestry Advertizer website
  • Advert-light access
  • Reader rewards

Mr Paterson was found by the then-parliamentary commissioner for standards to have breached the Commons code of conduct by lobbying ministers and officials for two companies paying him more than £100,000 per year. His actions were described as an “egregious” breach of the rules on paid advocacy by MPs.

Mr Paterson called the process “biased” and “not fair” and accused the commissioner of making up her mind before she had even spoken to him.

In November 2021, then-prime minister Boris Johnson tried to change the rules to prevent Mr Paterson’s six-week ban from Parliament, before being forced to U-turn in the face of public anger.