QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
Dr Raminder Ranger |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
The House of Lords Appointments Commission |
Defendant |
____________________
Mr Ben Hooper (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 19th November 2014
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
MR JUSTICE KNOWLES :
Introduction
Peerages for life
The Commission
"Any honour or dignity"
"Personal data processed for the purposes of—
(a) assessing any person's suitability for judicial office or the office of Queen's Counsel, or
(b) the conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity,
are exempt from the subject information provisions."
An implied qualification to displace the exemption
Further arguments with reference to European law
"… it is necessary to determine (1) whether the objective of the measure is sufficiently important to justify the limitation of a protected right, (2) whether the measure is rationally connected to the objective, (3) whether a less intrusive measure could have been used without unacceptably compromising the achievement of the objective, and (4) whether, balancing the severity of the measure's effects on the rights of the persons to whom it applies against the importance of the objective, to the extent that the measure will contribute to its achievement, the former outweighs the latter."
See Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2) [2013] UKSC 39, [2014] AC 700, 791 at [74] (per Lord Reed JSC) and [20] (per Lord Sumption JSC); de Frietas v Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Lands and Housing [1999] 1 AC 69, 80 (per Lord Clyde), Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] 2 AC 167 at [19] (per Lord Bingham of Cornhill), and R v Oakes [1986] 1 SCR 103 (per Dickson CJ).
Broader points
Conclusion
"…only considered the information that [Dr Ranger] personally provided. They did not seek, confidentially or otherwise, any other information about Dr Ranger (including information from his referees or from any other source). On the information provided by Dr Ranger, and taking into account the published criteria for nomination as a non-party political peer, the Commission did not think that his nomination was as strong as that of some other candidates, and was therefore unable to take his nomination any further".