R v Foreign Secretary, ex parte World Development Movement [1995] 1 WLR 386

• Legislation granted the secretary of state power to make grants in support of overseas development projects.

• He decided to make a grant in support of one that was clearly not economically viable, but where the grant would have protected the UK government’s credibility.

• We are only concerned here with the question of standing: CA said that Plaintiff, a pressure group, had locus standi.

Rose LJ

• The courts have taken an increasingly liberal approach to standing and he endorses what was said by Wilberforce (and Lord Fraser) in National Federation of Self-Employed about when the issue of standing often may need to be dealt with in the actual hearing.

• A number of factors influenced Rose LJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff had standing:

  1. “The importance of the issue raised;

  2. “The likely absence of any other responsible challenger”;

  3. “The nature of the breach of duty against which relief is sought”;

  4. “The prominence of these applicants in giving advice, guidance and assistance with regard to aid” (they had advised parliamentary committees etc).

• All these militate towards a finding that Plaintiff has sufficient interest within S.31(3) Supreme Court Act 1981.

RELATED CASES

• R v IRC, ex parte National Federation of Self Employed