By Gabriel Princewill-
Sir Lindsay Hoyle has applied to intervene in a legal fight brought by Simon Dolan and Cripps Barn Group against the Government’s lockdown restrictions.
Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons says he will intervene in the case because it raises issues of ‘constitutional importance’.
Representatives of Dolan told The Eye Of Media.Com that an application by the speaker is yet to be considered by the court, and is a matter for the judge.
Multi-millionaire businessman, Simon Dolan, and leading wedding venue operator Cripps are challenging the restrictions on wedding receptions which are devastating the hospitality industry. They are seeking a judicial review.
They argue that the Rule of Six, the 10pm curfew and the limit on wedding receptions to 15 people were introduced illegally and without proper scrutiny by parliament. Dolan has interestingly raised nearly £400k in crowdfunding to finance the case, though his representatives have been evasive as to why the incredibly wealthy businessman did not fund the case himself.
Some observers have suggested he may have wanted to involve the public in his fight, as a show of moral support. No large donators have identified themselves publicly.
Representatives of Dolan told The Eye Of Media.Com that an application by the speaker is yet to be considered by the court, and is a matter for the judge.
Legislation
The claimants allege that the British Government misused legislation to bring in the new regulations. They say the Government wrongly introduced the new measures through the Public Health (Control of Infectious Disease), by marking the application as allowing Ministers to make the laws effective immediately without approval in parliament.
The Speaker has apparently expressed concern that this aspect of the claim could breach Parliamentary privilege which is enshrined in Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689. The Speaker’s Counsel has stated that, if that happened, it would “amount to an attack on the ability of each House of Parliament to determine when and how to exercise its functions in scrutinising legislation, subject to the time limits imposed by statutory provisions.”
No public comment has been made by the speaker in this regard, and attempt to obtain a statement from mr.Hoyle’s representatives have been fruitless.
The Speaker’s intervention in the case comes at the same time as UK civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch has applied to intervene in the separate judicial review case brought by Mr Dolan which is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal next week.
Last Thursday lawyers acting for Simon Dolan and Cripps went to the High Court to seek an injunction against the Government’s latest restrictions on the grounds that they had been made unlawfully without prior Parliamentary approval. Mr Justice Swift denied the application for an injunction at the Royal Courts of Justice after a full day’s hearing.
However, Simon Dolan and Cripps are continuing with the case and are applying for a judicial review into the lockdown restrictions which prevent proper weddings from taking place.
Simon Dolan said: “It is ironic that the Speaker now getting involved in this case. The whole reason we are fighting the Government in court is because Parliament was not given a chance to scrutinise the latest lockdown restrictions.
Hoyle even stated himself that was unacceptable. Yet his intervention is all about the narrow issue of protecting Parliamentary privilege, rather than promoting the proper scrutiny of important legislation. But his intervention shows how important our legal fight is and how seriously it is being taken.
The Government could have decided to have the laws looked at and approved if it wished. It hasn’t tried to do so – deliberately – because it does not want Parliament involved. Hiding behind the notion that its lockdown laws are too “urgent” to be subject to scrutiny by Parliament is wrong.
“The decision by Mr Justice Swift last week was disappointing. I do not think he looked closely enough at the specific data about where infections are being passed on. He was happy to rely on what he had seen in ‘the news’. But that is not a detailed examination of the evidence. Coronavirus is not being spread in hospitality situations. The wedding sector is being unfairly destroyed by nonsensical laws which were imposed without proper debate or scrutiny in parliament
Entrepreneur Simon Doyle Image: youtube
Ultra Vires
Dolan’s representatives are asking the Court of Appeal to rule on whether the initial lockdown measures were brought in ‘ultra vires’ – outside the scope of the law they relied on in the Public Health Act.
“Since we started the legal fight against the Government’s lockdown in May people have been increasingly supportive of our arguments. It is now widely accepted that the harm from lockdown is greater than the risk to public health from COVID-19. The answer to coronavirus is not a circuit breaker or a three-tier system. It is to let people get on with their lives and their livelihoods.”
Family-run wedding and events firm Cripps has seen their business devastated by the Government’s restrictions. The business is being badly damaged by the new rule limiting weddings to 15 people – while pubs and restaurants can host unlimited numbers within individual groups.
Mark Henriques, Managing Director of Cripps & Co, said: “Last week’s decision is another blow to our business and to the wider hospitality industry. We were hoping the court would see sense and halt the new restrictions until they had been properly debated. We will now seek to have the restrictions examined at a judicial review.
“It makes no sense that spacious wedding venues, including some that seat 1,500 people, have to restrict themselves to 15 people. By next March the wedding dreams of around 500,000 brides and grooms will have been shattered.
A wedding meal for 100 people, with guests spaced as in restaurants, with no mingling or dancing, with modest consumption of alcohol and strict supervision, poses a very small risk indeed. We must overturn this absurd legislation so people can get on with their lives. We are doing this on behalf of wedding couples, business owners, staff and suppliers”.
British prime minister, Boris Johnson, has made clear his wishes to avoid another national lockdown, and has defied the advise of some of his scientific advisers to push for one, because of the potential lasting damage t the economy. However, Mr.Johnson is firmly of the view that the current restrictions are necessary and proportionate in light of the stated rises in infections and deaths in the Uk.
The litigants in this case are strongly opposed to that view, and are focusing on whether the restrictions pass the legal test.