Constitutional Conventions and the Prince of Wales

Adam Perry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1119-1128
Number of pages10
JournalModern Law Review
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2013


  • constitutional conventions
  • Prince of Wales
  • freedom of information
  • norms


Dive into the research topics of 'Constitutional Conventions and the Prince of Wales'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this