Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs v Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London

Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs v Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London

The Coroner erred in law by failing to give sufficient weight to the Secretary of State's assessment of national security risk and by not properly explaining how the balancing exercise justified disclosure. Given the real and significant risk to national security, no reasonable coroner could have ordered disclosure; the Coroner's decision was quashed and not remitted for reconsideration.

Parties
Claimant: The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs; Defendant: Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London; Interested Party: Guardian News and Media; Interested Party: Marina and Anatoly Litvinenko; Interested Party: Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Coroner's decision quashed; no remission for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Public Interest Immunity, Disclosure, Open Justice, Balancing Competing Public Interests
Administrative Law National Security Coronial Law Public Interest Immunity Disclosure Open Justice Balancing Competing Public Interests

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

Claimant

Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London

Defendant

Guardian News and Media

Interested Party

Marina and Anatoly Litvinenko

Interested Party

Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Coroner erred in rejecting the Secretary of State's claim for public interest immunity (PII) over certain documents relevant to the inquest into Alexander Litvinenko's death
  2. 2 Whether the Coroner failed to accord adequate respect to the Secretary of State's assessment of national security risk
  3. 3 Whether the Coroner properly undertook the balancing exercise between national security and open justice

Ratio Decidendi

The Coroner erred in law by failing to give sufficient weight to the Secretary of State's assessment of national security risk and by not properly explaining how the balancing exercise justified disclosure. Given the real and significant risk to national security, no reasonable coroner could have ordered disclosure; the Coroner's decision was quashed and not remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Coroner's decision quashed; no remission for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The Coroner's proposed gists are quashed.
  • Disclosure of the subject matter of the documents is not permitted.