Abstract
The Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) held in Evans v Information Commissioner that certain correspondence between Prince Charles and government officials must be disclosed under freedom of information legislation. Much of the judgment was devoted to a discussion of the constitutional conventions applicable to Prince Charles, and the case provides a useful example of how conventions and laws can interact. In this note, I argue that the Upper Tribunal misunderstood how conventions are distinguished from one another, and misapplied the test for the identification of conventions.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1119-1128 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Modern Law Review |
Volume | 76 |
Issue number | 6 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Nov 2013 |
Keywords
- constitutional conventions
- Prince of Wales
- freedom of information
- norms