header-logo header-logo

06 December 2018 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7820 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Unravelling (un)fairness

Nicholas Dobson discusses public law fairness

  • Simple unfairness as such is not a ground for judicial review.
  • Substantive unfairness is not a distinct legal criterion.
  • Equal treatment is not a distinct principle of UK administrative law.

‘Fair’s fair,’ so they say; and have been doing since at least 1898. For it seems it was then that the phrase first hit the stage in a novel called Castle Inn . But while fair may be fair (connoting reciprocity of fair treatment), where does fairness stand in public law? And does domestic administrative law acknowledge equal treatment as a distinct legal principle?

These knotty issues were up for unravelling by the Supreme Court on 16 May 2018 in R (Gallaher Group Ltd and others) v The Competition and Markets Authority [2018] UKSC 25. Lord Carnwath gave the leading judgment, with which Lords Mance and Hodge agreed. Lords Sumption and Briggs gave concurring decisions.

Summary background

In March 2003, under the Competition Act 1998, the former Office of Fair Trading (OFT) began investigating alleged tobacco industry price-fixing arrangements.

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
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

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll