header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 May 2024
Issue: 8071 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Public
printer mail-detail

Civil servants & redaction: identity matters

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
172564
The recent case of IAB may have caused a stir among junior civil servants, but they may not need to worry as much, suggests Nick Wrightson
  • Discusses IAB and its effect on junior civil servants, and proposes that there are powerful protections available.

In his leading judgment in Secretary of State for the Home Department and another v R (on the application of IAB & others) [2024] EWCA Civ 66, [2024] All ER (D) 128 (Mar), Lord Justice Bean branded the government’s routine practice of redacting civil servants’ names from documents for disclosure in judicial review proceedings ‘inimical to open government and unsupported by authority’.

Understandably, this finding may have caused a stir among ‘junior’ civil servants. They may well be left anxious that a society tending increasingly towards criticism and vitriol will target them if their names and roles are revealed. On another view, however, redaction was never the right tool for protecting potentially embattled public servants and their expectations have not been adequately managed. It may

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll