In [case], the Administrative Court declared that the SFO Director's decision to halt investigations into allegations of bribery in relation to arms contracts with Saudi Arabia had been unlawful. It was held that the Director had ceased to exercise the power to make the independent judgement conferred on him by Parliament by yielding to a threat allegedly made by a representative of the Saudi Government to the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff relating to future contractual arrangements. Submission to a threat would only be lawful when it was demonstrated that there was no alternative course open to the decision- maker and this was not the case in this instance. It was considered imperative that the courts should uphold the importance of the principle of the rule of law, by asserting the independent function of the Director in carrying out his statutory responsibilities to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption.
Answer
R (on the application of Corner House Research) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2008] EWHC 714 (Admin)
Tags
#illegality #judicial-review #public
Question
In [case], the Administrative Court declared that the SFO Director's decision to halt investigations into allegations of bribery in relation to arms contracts with Saudi Arabia had been unlawful. It was held that the Director had ceased to exercise the power to make the independent judgement conferred on him by Parliament by yielding to a threat allegedly made by a representative of the Saudi Government to the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff relating to future contractual arrangements. Submission to a threat would only be lawful when it was demonstrated that there was no alternative course open to the decision- maker and this was not the case in this instance. It was considered imperative that the courts should uphold the importance of the principle of the rule of law, by asserting the independent function of the Director in carrying out his statutory responsibilities to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption.
Answer
?
Tags
#illegality #judicial-review #public
Question
In [case], the Administrative Court declared that the SFO Director's decision to halt investigations into allegations of bribery in relation to arms contracts with Saudi Arabia had been unlawful. It was held that the Director had ceased to exercise the power to make the independent judgement conferred on him by Parliament by yielding to a threat allegedly made by a representative of the Saudi Government to the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff relating to future contractual arrangements. Submission to a threat would only be lawful when it was demonstrated that there was no alternative course open to the decision- maker and this was not the case in this instance. It was considered imperative that the courts should uphold the importance of the principle of the rule of law, by asserting the independent function of the Director in carrying out his statutory responsibilities to investigate allegations of fraud and corruption.
Answer
R (on the application of Corner House Research) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2008] EWHC 714 (Admin)
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it In R (on the application of Corner House Research) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2008] EWHC 714 (Admin), the Administrative Court declared that the SFO Director's decision to halt investigations into allegations of bribery in relation to arms contracts with Saudi Arabia had been unlawfu
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.