R (Evans) and anor. v Attorney General

The Supreme Court has upheld the Court of Appeal decision to allow letters from Prince Charles to the government to be published, after a campaign by The Guardian.

Rob Evans, a Guardian journalist, applied for disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Environmental Information Regulations 2004 of “advocacy correspondence” between Prince Charles and various Government departments.

The Upper Tribunal ordered that it was in the public interest for this correspondence to be disclosed. The Tribunal’s decision was then overridden by the Attorney General, using a statutory power which enabled him to veto a Court judgment. Mr Evans brought a judicial review of that decision, which was dismissed by the Divisional Court. The Court of Appeal then allowed Mr Evans’ appeal, and ordered the quashing of the Attorney General’s certificate. This had the effect of restoring the Tribunal judgment requiring the correspondence to be made public. The Court of Appeal found that there are only very limited circumstances in which it could be reasonable for a Government minister to overrule a finding made by an independent and impartial tribunal which has heard all the relevant evidence and produced a reasoned decision. It also decided that the use of the veto power to overrule the Tribunal in relation to environmental information is contrary to EU law.  The Government then took the case to the Supreme Court which has endorsed the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

The full judgment can be read here:
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2015/21.html

Dinah Rose QC and Ben Jaffey acted for the The Guardian.
James Eadie QC acted for The Attorney General.