Graham v Teesdale (1981) 81 LGR 117
Citation:Graham v Teesdale (1981) 81 LGR 117
Link to case on WorldLII (reference).
Rule of thumb:When can elected officials be removed from their post? If they have committed ‘wilful misconduct’, which means that it goes beyond a reckless breach of duties & was actually a knowing and deliberate breach of duties.
Judgment:
‘(3) If the councillors misconduct themselves knowingly or recklessly it is regarded by the law as wilful misconduct. The auditor's power to surcharge councillors under section 20(1)(b) of the 1982 Act is dependent on a finding of wilful misconduct. That expression was defined by Webster J in Graham v Teesdale (1981) 81 LGR 117 at 123 to mean "deliberately doing something which is wrong knowing it to be wrong or with reckless indifference as to whether it is wrong or not". That definition was approved by the Court of Appeal in Lloyd v McMahon [1987] AC 625 at 646-7, 655 and 674 and by the House of Lords at pp 697 and 702. It was adopted by the Divisional Court in the present case: (1997) 96 LGR 157 at 167-8. It was also accepted by the Court of Appeal: [2000] 2 WLR 1420 at p 1443. There was no challenge to this definition before the House and I would accept it as representing the intention of Parliament when using this expression’.
"wilful misconduct is... deliberately doing something which is wrong knowing it to be wrong or with reckless indifference as to whether it is wrong or not”, Webster J at 123
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.