Core Issues Trust Ltd, R (on the application of) v Transport for London & Anor [2014] EWHC 2628 (Admin) (30 July 2014)

Core Issues Trust Ltd, R (on the application of) v Transport for London & Anor [2014] EWHC 2628 (Admin) (30 July 2014)

On the evidence, the dominant purpose of the decision to refuse the advertisement was to comply with TfL's Advertising Policy and avoid causing widespread or serious offence, not to advance the Mayor's election campaign. Even if the Mayor's views were influential and coincided with his electoral interests, there is insufficient evidence that electoral advantage was the dominant or substantial motive. The decision was not taken for an improper purpose and was lawful.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2628 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Core Issues Trust Limited; First Defendant: Transport for London; Second Defendant: The Mayor of London (Boris Johnson)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Remitted to High Court After Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Improper Purpose, Freedom of Expression, Equality Duty, Statutory Powers, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Public Law Improper Purpose Freedom of Expression Equality Duty Statutory Powers Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Core Issues Trust Limited

Claimant

Transport for London

First Defendant

The Mayor of London (Boris Johnson)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Remitted to High Court After Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision to refuse the advertisement was taken for an improper purpose, namely to advance the Mayor's election campaign
  2. 2 Whether the refusal was a breach of the Claimant's human rights under Articles 9 or 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether the decision was made in accordance with TfL's Advertising Policy and statutory obligations

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, the dominant purpose of the decision to refuse the advertisement was to comply with TfL's Advertising Policy and avoid causing widespread or serious offence, not to advance the Mayor's election campaign. Even if the Mayor's views were influential and coincided with his electoral interests, there is insufficient evidence that electoral advantage was the dominant or substantial motive. The decision was not taken for an improper purpose and was lawful.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed