“House of Lords rules prerogative powers subject to judicial review”
The government banned trade union membership at GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters) without prior consultation with affected staff or unions. The decision was made under prerogative powers citing national security concerns after previous industrial action had disrupted intelligence operations.
Whether the exercise of prerogative powers is subject to judicial review, and whether the failure to consult trade unions before imposing the ban violated principles of procedural fairness.
Prerogative powers are subject to judicial review in principle, but the courts will not intervene where national security is genuinely at stake. The ban was lawful due to national security considerations.
This case fundamentally expanded judicial review by making prerogative powers generally reviewable, while establishing the modern grounds of judicial review that remain central to UK administrative law.
You're reading the free summary of CCSU v Minister for the Civil Service. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374 (HL)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.