In this Constitutional Law Matters video, Mark Elliott considers the Evans case, in which the UK Supreme Court held that the Attorney General had acted unlawfully when seeking to set aside a judicial decision that had ordered the disclosure (under the Freedom of Information Act 2000) between Prince Charles and Government Ministers. Professor Elliott explores the reasoning underpinning the Supreme Court’s conclusions, noting that the dissenting Justices were strongly critical of some of reasoning the majority, and explains that the Justices’ differing views can be understood in terms of a deeper, underlying disagreement about how fundamental constitutional principles relate to one another.
To find out more about the Constitutional Law Matters project, see: [ Ссылка ]
