Gill, R (On the Application Of) v Cabinet Office [No.3] [2020] EWHC 2931 (Admin) (06 November 2020)

Gill, R (On the Application Of) v Cabinet Office [No.3] [2020] EWHC 2931 (Admin) (06 November 2020)

The ONS lawfully applied its published and updated prioritisation tool, including the acceptability criterion, in assessing whether to include a Sikh ethnic group tick-box in the 2021 Census. There was no failure to apply published policy, no application of a secret policy, no inconsistency in the application of criteria, and no reliance on legally unsustainable conclusions. The decision-making process was rational, evidence-based, and within the ONS's discretion. The claim fails on all grounds.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2931 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Amrik Singh Gill; Defendant: Cabinet Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Census, Equality Duty, Judicial Review, Public Consultation, Statistical Decision Making

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amrik Singh Gill

Claimant

Cabinet Office

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the failure to include a Sikh ethnic group tick-box in the 2021 Census was unlawful
  2. 2 Whether the Office for National Statistics (ONS) failed to apply its published policy or applied a secret policy in assessing tick-boxes
  3. 3 Whether the ONS applied its criteria inconsistently between topics

Ratio Decidendi

The ONS lawfully applied its published and updated prioritisation tool, including the acceptability criterion, in assessing whether to include a Sikh ethnic group tick-box in the 2021 Census. There was no failure to apply published policy, no application of a secret policy, no inconsistency in the application of criteria, and no reliance on legally unsustainable conclusions. The decision-making process was rational, evidence-based, and within the ONS's discretion. The claim fails on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed