“£200,000 was spent on legal fees for a case that didn’t need to happen because you could have simply said “yes, we were in breach”.
The Judge agreed these delays hindered proper scrutiny: "if the publication had been on time… the First Claimant would have been able to scrutinise CANs and contract provisions, ask questions about them and raise any issues with oversight bodies such as the NAO or via MPs"
The Judge also said our legal action sped up the publishing of Covid-related contracts - which in Nov 2020 was on average 78 days: “I have no doubt that this claim has speeded up compliance.” (See para 149 of the judgment) drive.google.com/file/d/19QsmLv…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Good Law Project

Good Law Project Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GoodLawProject

23 Feb
BREAKING: the Court has granted a cost-capping order in our judicial review with @EveryDoctorUK over the award of huge PPE contracts without competition to Ayanda, Pestfix and Clandeboye. THREAD rebrand.ly/ppe-keep-fight…
In awarding the cost-capping order, the Judge seemed to agree:

“All citizens are likely to have an interest in whether or not the procurement on the part of the government is done using good governance procedures and integrity."
The Judge continued: "And therefore there is a real wider public interest that has been represented by the claimant group, which is a not-for-profit group, in bringing this challenge”
Read 7 tweets
22 Feb
Yesterday, Matt Hancock brazenly rationalised his own breaches of transparency law as merely “technical".

This line had not gone down well when Hancock’s barrister tried it out with the High Court...THREAD

What does “technical” mean, asked the Judge?

Nothing, said Philip Moser QC - barrister for the Secretary of State.
In his judgment, the Judge decried the Government's use of “technical” as an:

“attempt to suggest, contrary to the fact, that the breaches were trivial or that they had occurred in an insubstantial number of cases.”
Read 8 tweets
19 Feb
BREAKING: WE’VE WON - High Court rules Government acted unlawfully by failing to publish details of Covid-related contracts.

@Debbie_abrahams @CarolineLucas @LaylaMoran rebrand.ly/uc-win-1902

The High Court has ruled that Government has acted unlawfully by failing to disclose details of Covid-related contracts, in breach of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and its own guidance.

You can read the judgment in full here: rebrand.ly/uc-judgment
“The Secretary of State acted unlawfully by failing to comply with the Transparency Policy” and “there is now no dispute that, in a substantial number of cases, the SoS breached his legal obligation to publish Contract Award Notices within 30 days of the award of contracts.”
Read 12 tweets
15 Feb
Today is our judicial review hearing over the Government contract awarded to friends of Dominic Cummings at Public First without competition.

We'll be tweeting live from 10.30am. goodlawproject.org/case/money-for…
We'll be keeping our website updated with the key documents referred to in our barristers' - and the Government's barristers' - submissions. 👇goodlawproject.org/case/money-for…
And we're off!

Our judicial review over the Government contract awarded to friends of Dominic Cummings at Public First without competition has begun.

You can now read the extraordinary skeleton arguments and witness statements on our website. 👇 rebrand.ly/dc-case-tweet
Read 30 tweets
3 Feb
Jason Coppel QC is taking the Court through our skeleton argument now: THREAD
“In a claim about the transparency of government spending, the Claimants find it astonishing that the Defendant has filed a statement of costs of over £200,000 for a one-day JR in which a significant part of the breaches alleged are admitted.”
We believe transparency is fundamental to ensuring public money is well spent. The @NAOorguk 'Investigation into Government procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic' backs up our concerns - para 3.24: nao.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
Read 26 tweets
3 Feb 20
Almost a year ago we sued HMRC for failing to assess Uber to - we believe - substantially in excess of £1bn of VAT. /1
After we sued it HMRC asked the High Court for permission to tell us what it then did about Uber's tax bill - permission the High Court gave. /2
Uber appealed and the Court of Appeal has now decided to hear - and expedited - Uber's appeal against the High Court decision. /3
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!