The Court of Appeal has allowed the Secretary of State’s appeal against a decision of the Administrative Court, in which it had been declared that the prohibitions on smoking contained in Part 1 of the Health Act 2006 applied to the Crown and to Crown property. The Court of Appeal considered previous case law in which the Crown had been found to be bound by statutory obligations by way of “necessary implication”. The Court agreed with the Secretary of State’s submission that the test for such a necessary implication was a demanding one, and that it was not satisfied in this case. Parliament must have intended, so far as Crown property was concerned, to leave the regulation of smoking to the arena of policy and public law, rather than to the requirements of a statute which created criminal liabilities.
The full judgment can be read here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2016/125.html
James Eadie QC and David Pievsky acted for the Secretary of State.