UK: Designing the Consultation Exercise

Last Updated: 20 January 2003

Some implications of the recent East Kent NHS Trust and Medway Council (Gatwick Airport) cases.

Introduction

It has for long been common for statutes to provide that before a public body exercises a statutory function it should engage in a process of consultation with such categories of interested parties as the statute may define.

These procedural obligations have been quite rigorously policed by the judges, who have generally regarded as null and void acts and decisions taken following failure to have consulted, or consulted adequately. The judges have regarded such statutory duties as important both in terms of the solace they may provide the citizen in knowing that his or her opinions must be sought and considered by the public body in question, and also because such procedures have clear potential to enhance the quality of decision-making. Decisions informed by a broad range of information and opinion should, in principle, be of better quality than decisions taken from a narrower, and probably more remote, perspective.

In addition to requirements to consult which are provided expressly by statutory provision the judges have in recent years developed case-law doctrine which provides that in certain circumstances a duty to consult may exist even though the statute governing a public body's exercise of its functions is silent on the matter. This will be the case in circumstances where the public body may have conducted itself in such as way as, by word or deed, to have unequivocally given to a claimant a legitimate expectation that a decision would not be taken without his or her views first being sought and considered.

The East Kent NHS Trust and the Medway Council (Gatwick Airport) cases

Two recent decisions of the Administrative Court have shed some valuable light on the scope of such obligations on public bodies to engage in consultation as a precondition of the valid exercise of statutory powers.

  • R (on application of Smith) v East Kent NHS Trust and Another (Administrative Court, 4 December 2002) deals with the duty (if any) to re-consult in cases where wisdom gained from a consultation exercise into certain stated policy options leads the decision-maker to conclude that a rather different option should ultimately be pursued. In the absence of a further process of consultation will there have been proper consultation in relation to that final decision?
  • R (on application of Medway Council & ors) v Secretary of State for Transport (Administrative Court, 26 November 2002) explores the circumstances in which a claimant may challenge a consultation exercise on the basis that the range of options upon which the consultation focuses has been set inappropriately narrowly.

The East Kent NHS Trust case

The facts of East Kent were complex. In his judgment Silber J describes in some considerable detail the recent history of changes in health care provision at hospitals within Kent, the various options for further change which were presented for comment during a statutory consultation exercise in early 2002, and the decision about restructuring services as subsequently announced by East Kent NHS Trust.

For present purposes it is sufficient to note that Silber J's assessment of the facts was that the difference between the options consulted upon and the final decision of the NHS Trust was not so fundamental as to lead to the conclusion that that final decision had not been consulted upon. In the language of an earlier case, the final decisions could be regarded as having 'emerged from' and 'reflected' the consultation process. Accordingly, on the facts, the challenge failed.

However, the position would have been different had the judge found there to have been a more fundamental difference between the consultation options and the ultimate decisions. In such a case the challenge would have succeeded: the final decision would not have been preceded by a proper process of consultation.

To persuade a judge that the facts fall into this category may, however, not be easy: the test to be satsified is a strong one. Silber J explained the proper judicial approach as follows:

"The concept of fairness should determine whether there is a need to re-consult if the decision-maker wishes to accept a fresh proposal but the court should not be too liberal in the use of its power of judicial review to compel further consultation on any change. In determining whether there should be further re-consultation, a proper balance has to be struck between the strong obligation to consult on the part of the health authority and the need for decisions to be taken that affect the running of the Health Service. This means that there should only be re-consultation if there is a fundamental difference between the proposals consulted on and those which the consulting party subsequently wishes to adopt".

Medway Council (Gatwick Airport)

In this case a challenge was brought in relation to the scope of a consultation to be conducted by the Department for Transport into how how much extra airport capacity will be needed over the next 30 years, and where that capacity should be located. The consultation exercise would lead to a White Paper during 2003 setting out Government policy.

Objectors to possible development at certain potential locations (Stansted in Essex, and Cliffe in north Kent) objected to the omission of 'enlargement of capacity at Gatwick' from the range of options upon which consultees' views were sought.

Maurice Kay J accepted the arguments put forward by the claimants that the reasons put forward by the Government in support of its decision to exclude 'Gatwick' from the consultation process were tainted by irrationality, and held that the range of consultation options should have included the possibility of accommodating further capacity at that airport. Certain difficulties, referred to by Government, associated with the development of Gatwick were not such as to warrant omission of this option from the range of options in relation which the consultation should have been focused. Further, the known 'nature conservation' issues associated with development of an airport at Cliffe required that that option would need in due course to be assessed in the light of the availability of alternative sites which might have a lesser nature conservation impact. It followed that a proper initial assessment of the Cliffe option required a wide range of information as regards its comparative advantages and disadvantages as compared to all other potential locations (including Gatwick) for adding to airport capacity.

In relation to this last argument Maurice Kay J commented:

"The Consultation Document contemplates a serious possibility that the White Paper will express a policy which includes the development of Cliffe but ... at the moment, the Government has not decided whether there are any viable alternatives or whether imperative reasons of overriding public interest resolve the matter in favour of Cliffe. I therefore infer that it has not decided that Heathrow and Stansted, separately or together, would amount to a viable alternative or, indeed, that Heathrow, Stansted and Gatwick, separately or together, would not. Moreover, ... it may be the case that Gatwick, by itself or with one or both of the others, would be an ... alternative solution ....

I have come to the conclusion that, in the context of these conservation considerations, it was irrational to exclude all Gatwick options from the consultation process."

Conclusion

These two recent decisions provide a valuable reminder that public bodies including regulators should design their consultation processes with some care. Consultations tend nowadays to be fairly specific as regards the matters upon which views are particularly sought. This may assist consultees focus their responses, and may assist government in its collation and assessment of responses. However, some care should be taken that such itemisation of options or matters upon which a public body seeks opinions should not

  • offer potential for challenge to the consultation process as involving too narrow a range of considerations relevant to the decision to be taken (as in Medway County Council (Gatwick)); or
  • unduly constrain options as regards the ultimate decision to be taken without a re-consultation exercise being necessary (as contemplated in East Kent NHS)

Care taken in the design of the consultation exercise may well provide protection from the possibility of subsequent judicial challenge.

© Herbert Smith 2003

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

For more information on this or other Herbert Smith publications, please email us.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.