Core Issues Trust, R (on the application of) v Transport For London & Anor

Core Issues Trust, R (on the application of) v Transport For London & Anor

The court cannot determine whether TfL's decision was instructed by the Mayor or made for an improper purpose without further evidence. If the decision was not made for an improper purpose, the refusal to allow the Trust's advertisement was justified, proportionate, and not in breach of Articles 9 or 10 of the Convention, nor section 13 of the Human Rights Act. The Advertising Policy is sufficiently precise, pursues legitimate aims, and its application was proportionate given the intrusive nature of bus advertising and the risk of encouraging homophobia.

Parties
Appellant: Core Issues Trust; Respondent: Transport for London; Intervener: Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Minister for Women and Equalities
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal
Outcome
Case remitted for further investigation as to whether the decision was instructed by the Mayor or made for an improper purpose.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Improper Purpose, Public Sector Equality Duty, Advertising Policy, Discrimination, Freedom of Religion
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Equality Law Freedom of Expression Improper Purpose Public Sector Equality Duty Advertising Policy Discrimination +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Core Issues Trust

Appellant

Transport for London

Respondent

Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Minister for Women and Equalities

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether TfL's refusal to allow the Trust's advertisement was motivated by improper purpose (advancing the Mayor's election campaign)
  2. 2 Whether the refusal breached Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether the refusal was prescribed by law, pursued a legitimate aim, and was proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The court cannot determine whether TfL's decision was instructed by the Mayor or made for an improper purpose without further evidence. If the decision was not made for an improper purpose, the refusal to allow the Trust's advertisement was justified, proportionate, and not in breach of Articles 9 or 10 of the Convention, nor section 13 of the Human Rights Act. The Advertising Policy is sufficiently precise, pursues legitimate aims, and its application was proportionate given the intrusive nature of bus advertising and the risk of encouraging homophobia.

Court Disposition

Case remitted for further investigation as to whether the decision was instructed by the Mayor or made for an improper purpose.

Orders

  • Remit case to the judge for reconsideration in light of fresh evidence and further directions.
  • If decision was not instructed by the Mayor or made for improper purpose, original refusal stands.