A local authority operator of an airport suspended flights on aircraft transporting livestock; a harbour authority refused to allow cross-Channel services for the export of live animals; and a local authority challenged the decision of a statutory body operating a dock not to ban the export of live animals. In each case what was relied on to justify imposing a ban was the activity and size of the disruptive protests.
Held: None of the bans was lawful under the body’s statutory power but each was, or would have been, unlawful. The authority had given in to unlawful threats. ‘None of them, it appears, gave the least thought to the awesome implications for the rule of law of doing what they propose.’ This was contrary to ‘the thread [which] runs consistently throughout all the case law; the recognition that public authorities must beware of surrendering to the dictates of unlawful pressure groups.’ A lawful trade in live animals was not to be interrupted for fear of public disorder.
Judges:
Simon Brown LJ, Popplewell J
Citations:
Independent 13-Apr-1995, Times 17-Apr-1995, [1995] EWHC Admin 1, [1995] 3 All ER 37
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Sussex, ex Parte International Trader’s Ferry Limited HL 2-Apr-1998
Chief Constable has a Wide Discretion on Resources
Protesters sought to prevent the appellant’s lawful trade exporting live animals. The police provided assistance, but then restricted it, pleading lack of resources. The appellants complained that this infringed their freedom of exports under . .
Cited – Corner House Research and Campaign Against Arms Trade, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and Another Admn 10-Apr-2008
The defendant had had responsibility to investigate and if necessary prosecute a company suspected of serious offences of bribery and corruption in the conduct of contract negotiations. The investigation had been stopped, alledgedly at the . .
Cited – Corner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Local Government, Administrative
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.86452