I was pleased by a particular dimension of the decision in the Judicial Review brought by the Good Law Project on the Department for Health's failure to publish PPE contracts on time. This was its decision that the Good Law Project had what is called ‘standing' to bring the case.
The Department for Health had, it seems, relied entirely on the fact that the judge hearing the case would decide that neither the Good Law Project or the MPs bringing the case would have the capacity to do so because they could not have suffered loss as a result of the contracts being offered to the people who got them.
The critical suggestion was this from para 103 onwards. The Mr Moser referred to was the lawyer acting for the Department of Health:
In effect, there could be no complaint from a commercial rival if no one even knew the contract was on offer because it was not tendered. There had, then, to be another party who could complain, so long as well motivated but without seeking gain. The Good Law Project was deemed to have standing in that capacity. The MPs were not: it was suggested they had another route for remedy.
So why does this please me? Because it suggests that civil society does have the legal capacity to challenge the government on the externalities it creates that impose a cost on society. And that is a rare bit of good news.
My thanks to Jolyon Maugham and his team.
I should declare that I donate to the work of the Good Law Project.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
This is a great cause for celebration. I too donate monthly to GLP, and in particular to this current campaign of judicial review to challenge cronyism and hold an undemocratic government to account. But it is also a cause to celebrate as it demonstrates that we can all do something, even if it limited to financial support, within whatever limited means we have, to a worthy endeavour. So many people feel dejected, defeated, hopeless – “there is nothing we can do to change anything”……this result shows otherwise. We can all do something. The “butterfly effect” really does exist.
The GLP is, as you say Richard, one of the few causes for hope at the moment. I too make a monthly donation, and am following their progress closely. As Jim says, it shows we can make a difference. In fact, given Labour’s uselessness in taking this corrupt and incompetent government to task, I’d say the GLP is now the official opposition in this country.
Let’s hope to God that the GLP’s application for a cost capping order re the judicial review succeeds. As the GLP point out, the government is claiming that the cases it’s been contesting with the GLP have incurred costs of £200k, £500k and £1m, far more than is usually the case for such reviews. No problem in spending ‘taxpayers’ money here apparently, in a desperate attempt to avoid scrutiny of its actions. (as per, the MMT clearly exists when Tory politicians want it to).
It would be nice if Labour could back the GLP’s brave efforts by calling for Hancock’s resignation or similar in the light of his now-proven law breaking.
Agreed…
I agree, especially with your last point. Imagine how JM must feel fighting his lone battle only to have the leader of the opposition effectively nullify his one victory so far? One lawyer cancelling another, even though they are both, allegedly, on the same side. Labour are a source of anger for me right now that I could well do without. That said, well played the GLP.