2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involved a judicial review of the UK Government's proposed decision to notify the Council of its wish to participate in the European Arrest Warrant as per Article 10(5) of Protocol 36 of the TFEU. The claimant argued that this decision required a referendum under the European Union Act 2011 and claimed a legitimate expectation for a parliamentary vote based on previous statements. The court held that the government was not legally required to hold a referendum and the legitimate expectation claim was not enforceable in public law. The decision included detailed discussions on the legal frameworks relevant to the European Arrest Warrant and the 2011 Act, and referenced the Assange and Wheeler cases.
Judgment
Sir Brian Leveson P :
This is an application for permission to bring a claim for judicial review of a proposed decision by Her Majesty’s Government to give notice pursuant to Article 10(5) of Protocol 36 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“The TFEU”) that the United Kingdom wishes to participate in the Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant (“EAW”).
In brief, the Claimant contends that Her Majesty’s Government may not give such notice without first holding a referendum on whether that proposed decision should be approved. That issue raises a question of the proper interpretation of the European Union Act 2011 (“ the 2011 Act ”) and the circumstances in which, pursuant to that Act, a referendum must be held prior to a particular decision being adopted. The Claimant subsequently added a further ground of challenge, namely a claim that an representations had been made that there be a vote in Parliament before such notice is given, and that these representation gave rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable as a matter of public law.
Before embarking on the detail of this judgment, given the frequent complaints of delay in relation to judicial review, it is worth saying something about the procedural history. A letter of claim was issued and sent to the Office of the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for the Home Department on 10 November. These proceedings were issued on the following day with a detailed statement of facts and grounds (dated 10 November). Also on 11 November, the second ground of claim was served. Grounds of Resistance were served on 12 November and a skeleton argument provided on behalf of the Claimant on the following day, 13 November. Arrangements were made for this hearing, dealing with the application for permission, and, if permission is granted, final relief today, Friday 14 November. Further arrangements have also been made that should an unsuccessful party wish to appeal this decision, a Court of Appeal will be assembled at 2.00 pm on Monday 17 November, less than a week after commencement of proceedings.
Needless to say, this expedition can only be organised on an exceptional basis not least because of the disruption that it causes to the work of the court. Where the circumstances are exceptional, however, and where truly in the public interest, it should not be thought that the courts cannot proceed at speed and we are grateful to the parties and their representatives