header-logo header-logo

30 July 2009
Issue: 7380 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Freedom of information

HM Treasury v Information Commissioner [2009] EWHC 1811 (Admin), [2009] All ER (D) 218 (Jul)

The case concerned a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA 2000). Essentially what was being sought was the opinion of counsel—a ‘Law Officer’, as defined under s 35(5) of FOIA 2000 —for the appellant, HM Treasury, who, it was alleged, had given support to the Prime Minister’s declaration that the Financial Services and Markets Bill was compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998.

The Court of Appeal noted, per curiam, that the Law Officers’ Convention now operated subject to the principles of the Act, which meant that neither the government department that might have sought or received the advice or the Law Officers that gave it would any longer make final or binding decisions on what, whether and when information might be disclosed.

It could be contemplated, for example, that the context for the commencement of hostilities in Iraq was of such public importance that irrespective of the decision of government to make partial disclosure, the

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll