Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
Before Easter, the UK Supreme Court heard one of the most significant cases on freedom of information law since the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Environmental Information Regulations 2004 came into force.
At its heart were letters and memos which the Prince of Wales had written to various government ministers and politicians in the middle of the last decade--often referred to as 'black spider' letters because of the heir to the throne's distinctive handwriting.
The journalist Gareth Evans of the Guardian newspaper had been trying for many years to have this material published under freedom of information legislation. On 26 March 2015, the court ruled that the letters and memos should be disclosed.
LexisNexis recently interviewed Dinah Rose QC of Blackstone Chambers who acted for the Mr Evans. Here’s what she had to say on this important case. For lawyers, it’s clear that the legal significance of the case extends beyond just freedom of information laws…
The case is significant partly because of its facts—people are very interested to see what Prince Charles has written in his letters to ministers.
However, for lawyers, it has a wider legal significance. The Supreme Court has emphasised the constitutional importance of the principle that the government, like everyone else, is bound by the decisions of a court, and that it would be reasonable for a government minister to override a court judgment only in the rarest of circumstances.
Lord Neuberger’s judgment re-states the importance of the principle of legality—that Parliament may override fundamental rights only if the legislation uses ‘crystal clear’ language to that effect. This could be very important if a future government repealed the Human Rights Act 1998, leaving the common law as the main source of fundamental rights in the UK.
The main issues were whether it was reasonable for the Attorney General to veto the decision of the Upper Tribunal ordering the disclosure of the letters, and whether the statutory right of veto was in any event incompatible with EU law on the disclosure of environmental information.
The result of the judgment is clear. However, the matter is complicated by the fact that, of the majority of five, two separate judgments (the judgments of Lord Neuberger and Lord Mance) take rather different approaches.
There remains scope for argument about the breadth of the veto power under FIA 2000 in future cases.
However, as far as environmental information goes, the judgment definitively rules that no ministerial veto can be used. It also confirms that the right to appeal against a refusal to disclose environmental information must be a full merits appeal.
This case will now return to the Upper Tribunal for some final issues to be resolved before the letters are disclosed. There is no further right of appeal for the government.
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 has already been amended to give an absolute exemption to royal correspondence.
However, there is no such amendment in relation to environmental information, and nor could there be, compatibility with EU law. It thus remains possible for requests to be made for the disclosure of correspondence from Prince Charles which falls within the broad definition of environmental information in the EIR 2004.
Interviewed by Robert Matthews. The views expressed by our legal analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.
0330 161 1234