Commissioners for Crown Lands v Page, [1960] 2 Q.B. 274, EWCA

Citation:Commissioners for Crown Lands v Page, [1960] 2 Q.B. 274, EWCA

Link to case on WorldLII (reference).

Rule of thumb:What happens if the Government enters into a contract with terms relating to how core public services will be run? The contractual term is invalid – any contractual seeking to stipulate how Government functions will be run is not worth the paper it is written on.

Judgment:

The basic facts of this case were that a lease was acquired by the Crown using emergency powers. There was a term in the lease requiring ‘private enjoyment’, which the Crown did not follow in the pursuit of their obligations. The Court held that any terms which fettered the use of prerogative or discretion under statute were not valid terms, ‘When the Crown, or any other person, is entrusted, whether by virtue of the prerogative or by statute, with discretionary powers to be exercised for the public good, it does not, when making a private contract in general terms, undertake (and it may be that it could not even with the use of specific language validly undertake) to fetter itself in the use of those powers, and in the exercise of its discretion’, Devlin LJ at 291

Ratio-decidendi:

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.