header-logo header-logo

14 February 2008
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Profession , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Newspapers win judicial review court papers access

Freedom of Information

The press and public will have auto­matic access to court documents in judicial review cases following a High Court ruling.

The Times, The Financial Times and The Guardian brought the case after their request for access to a key court document was refused during the judicial review of the Serious Fraud Office’s decision to abandon its corruption probe into BAE Systems.

After proceedings were brought over this refusal, the document was provided but the newspapers continued the case to establish the point of principle of automatic access to such documents in judi­cial review proceedings.

In the third party application in R (Corner House Research) v Direc­tor of the Serious Fraud Office, the government argued that new rules introduced in October 2006, giving the public access to statements of case filed during court cases, did not apply to the summary.

it was anomalous that the rules applied to the claim form in such proceedings but not to the defend­ant’s documents.

In the absence of any principled justification, he said he would not hesitate to hold that the defend­ant’s documents were “defences” and were therefore covered by the new rules.

Olswang partner, Dan Tench, who acted for the newspapers, says: “The judge noted that the public inter­est in judicial review proceedings was if anything greater than that in private law proceedings and that there was no good reason to deny the same degree of public access to the key court documents.”

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll