R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody UKHL 8, 1 AC 531 was an important UK constitutional law case concerning applications for judicial review.

Facts Four prisoners, Stephen Doody, John David Pierson, Elfed Wayne Smart and Kenneth Pegg,House of Lords, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody (1993) UKHL 8, published 24 June 1993, accessed 19 June 2022 serving mandatory life sentences, requested judicial review after the Home Secretary refused to release them after serving their minimum terms, but gave no reason for the decision. Under common law, there is no duty to give reasons for decisions;R. (on the application of Hasan) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry EWCA Civ 1311 however, this case is one of the exceptions.

Judgment Lord Mustill judged that the Home Secretary must give reasons for their decision. He argued that decisions made using a statutory power must be reached fairly, because all statutory powers are granted with the implicit assumption that they will be wielded fairly. As a result, he concluded it will often be necessary to allow a person to make representations, and therefore to allow them to know what they are responding to, they must be permitted to hear the reason they are having to make the representations at all.

See also Judicial review

References

External links Judgment on BAILII