Supreme Court applies Public Interest Immunity in an inquest and overturns potential disclosure of gists (In the matter of an application by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland for Judicial Review (Appellant))
The UK Supreme Court has unanimously held that decisions on Public Interest Immunity (PII) involve a substantive question of law requiring courts to determine where the overall public interest lies, rather than applying ordinary public law review standards. In a case concerning the inquest into the 1994 death of Liam Paul Thompson in Belfast, the Court ruled that neither of two gists of sensitive information should be disclosed. It found that the Coroner erred by failing to apply the correct balancing test, disregarding the Secretary of State’s assessment of national security risks, and omitting key procedural steps. The judgment emphasises that appellate courts must form their own view on disclosure and conduct the Wiley PII balancing exercise. The appeal was allowed, with the Supreme Court noting that a statutory inquiry or review by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery would be more appropriate given the statutory deadline and security concerns. Ian Gascoigne comments on the public interest immunity aspect at the core of the appeal.