Livingstone v Adjudication Panel for England

Livingstone v Adjudication Panel for England

The Code of Conduct did not apply to the appellant's remarks as he was not acting in his official capacity nor 'in performing his functions' as Mayor; Paragraph 4 of the Code must be construed narrowly and does not extend to purely private conduct; even if it did, the application in this case was a disproportionate interference with freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR; and the remarks did not bring the office of Mayor into disrepute.

Parties
Appellant: Ken Livingstone; Respondent: The Adjudication Panel for England; Interested Party: Mr Steven Kingston, Ethical Standards Officer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Adjudication Panel
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Code of Conduct for Public Officials, Freedom of Expression, Statutory Interpretation, Ultra Vires, Proportionality
Administrative Law Local Government Law Human Rights Code of Conduct for Public Officials Freedom of Expression Statutory Interpretation Ultra Vires Proportionality

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ken Livingstone

Appellant

The Adjudication Panel for England

Respondent

Mr Steven Kingston, Ethical Standards Officer

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Statutory Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Adjudication Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was acting in his official capacity or 'in performing his functions' under the Code of Conduct when making the remarks in question
  2. 2 Whether Paragraph 4 of the Model Code of Conduct is ultra vires the Local Government Act 2000 insofar as it applies to conduct outside official capacity
  3. 3 Whether the application of the Code to the appellant's remarks was a disproportionate interference with his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Code of Conduct did not apply to the appellant's remarks as he was not acting in his official capacity nor 'in performing his functions' as Mayor; Paragraph 4 of the Code must be construed narrowly and does not extend to purely private conduct; even if it did, the application in this case was a disproportionate interference with freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR; and the remarks did not bring the office of Mayor into disrepute.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Finding of failure to comply with the Code of Conduct set aside
  • Suspension quashed