Christopher Williamson M.P. v Jennie Formby (sued as a representative of all members of the Labour Party except the Claimant)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Pepperall |
| Judgment Date | 10 October 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] EWHC 2639 (QB) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No. QB-2019-002799 |
| Date | 10 October 2019 |
[2019] EWHC 2639 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice,
Strand, London WC2A 2LL
THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Pepperall
Case No. QB-2019-002799
Aileen McColgan (instructed by Bindmans LLP) for the Claimant
Rachel Crasnow QC and Tom Gillie (instructed by Greenwoods GRM LLP) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 12 September 2019
Approved judgment
I direct that pursuant to CPR PD39A para. 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
Chris Williamson MP is a controversial figure in the Labour movement. Some consider that he is an “apologist” for antisemitism within the Labour Party. To others, he is a champion of free speech who has defended colleagues who have been wrongly accused of antisemitism.
Mr Williamson joined the Labour Party in 1976 and has served the Party as a councillor on Derby City Council, including for two periods as Council Leader; as the Member of Parliament for Derby North from 2010–2015 and again since 2017; and as a shadow minister.
On 27 February 2019, Mr Williamson was suspended as a member of the Party pending an internal investigation into allegations that he had brought it into disrepute. On 26 June 2019, Labour's National Executive Committee (“NEC”) Disputes Panel concluded that Mr Williamson had broken the Party's rules but that he should be readmitted with a formal warning.
The panel's decision provoked outrage and, on 9 July 2019, the NEC Disputes Panel determined that its earlier decision could not safely stand. On 19 July 2019, the NEC referred Mr Williamson's case to Labour's National Constitutional Committee (“NCC”). No notice of hearing has yet been issued by the NCC.
Fearful that the matter might not be resolved quickly and that he would not be allowed to stand for the Labour Party in the event of an early general election, Mr Williamson issued these proceedings on 6 August 2019. The case is brought against Jennie Formby, the Labour Party's General Secretary, as a representative of the Party. Mr Williamson seeks declarations that the 26 June decision stands and that the subsequent decisions on 9 and 19 July were unlawful. Further, he seeks an injunction restraining the Party from pursuing the case against him.
On 3 September 2019, Labour launched a second disciplinary case against Mr Williamson and he was re-suspended as a member of the Party pending investigation. Mr Williamson seeks a declaration that this further suspension was unlawful and an injunction restraining the party from pursuing its proposed investigation into the new allegations.
It is important to stress at the outset of this judgment that this case is not about whether Mr Williamson is, or is not, antisemitic or even whether he has, or has not, breached the rules of the Labour Party. The issue is whether the Party has acted lawfully in its investigation and prosecution of such charges against Mr Williamson.
THE GOVERNANCE OF THE LABOUR PARTY
The Labour Party is an unincorporated association. It is governed by the Labour Party Rule Book 2019, the NEC Terms of Reference and the NEC Standing Orders. This case concerns charges pursuant to chapter 2.I.8 which provides that members should not “engage in any conduct which in the opinion of the NEC is prejudicial, or in any act which in the opinion of the NEC is grossly detrimental to the Party.” The rule continues, in so far as it is relevant to this case, by providing that the NEC shall treat as conduct prejudicial to the Party:
“any incident which in their view might reasonably be seen to demonstrate hostility or prejudice based on … race; religion or belief …; these shall include but not be limited to incidents involving racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia or other racist language, sentiments, stereotypes or actions”
DISCIPLINARY ACTION
By chapter 1.VIII.3.A, the NEC has the duty and power:
“to uphold and enforce the constitution, rules and standing orders of the Party and to take any action it deems necessary for such purpose, ….;
in furtherance of such duties it shall have the power to suspend or take other administrative action against individual members of the Party subject to the provisions of the disciplinary rules set out in Chapter 6 below of these rules.”
Chapter 6 makes provision for disciplinary action to be taken either nationally by the NEC or locally by a Constituency Labour Party (a “CLP”). Chapter 6.I.1 provides:
“The NEC shall take such disciplinary measures as it deems necessary to ensure that all Party members and officers conform to the constitution, rules and standing orders of the Party.
Such powers shall include:
A. In relation to any alleged breach of the constitution, rules or standing orders of the Party by an individual member …, the NEC may, pending final outcome of any investigation and charges (if any), suspend that individual … from office or representation of the Party notwithstanding the fact that the individual concerned has been or may be eligible to be selected as a candidate in any election or by-election. The General Secretary or other national officer shall investigate and report to the NEC on such investigation. Upon such report being submitted, the NEC may instruct the General Secretary or other national officer to formulate charges against the individual … concerned and present such charges to the NCC for determination in accordance with their applicable procedures. Without prejudice to Chapter 1.VIII.5, the powers of the NEC and General Secretary under this sub-clause may be exercised, as the NEC deems appropriate, through such persons as may be designated …
C. Where in the opinion of the NEC there are circumstances which might warrant the use of its powers under [sub-clause] A above …, the NEC may issue written warnings to any individual member of the Party drawing attention to the conduct which in the opinion of the NEC is either incompatible with continued membership of the Party or may be in, or may lead to, a breach of the constitution, rules or standing orders of the Party. The issue of any written warning under this sub-clause shall not prevent the conduct that is the subject of such warning being called into question following any subsequent exercise by the NEC of its powers under [sub-clause] A above …, and both the fact of the issue of such warning and the conduct that is the subject of the warning may be used in the evidence referred to the NCC.”
Chapter 2.III.2 provides:
“Without prejudice to any other provision of these rules and without prejudice to its powers under Chapter 1.VIII, the NEC shall be empowered to determine any dispute or question which may arise in respect of membership of the Party, either by considering the matter itself or by referring the matter to the NEC Disputes Panel for a decision. In such cases, the NEC's decision, or the decision of the NEC Disputes Panel as approved by the NEC, shall be final and binding.”
As to the NCC's role in disciplinary matters, chapter 1.IX.2 provides that the NCC has the duty and power “to determine by hearing or otherwise such disciplinary matters as are presented to it” by either a CLP or the officers of the Party on the instructions of the NEC. Upon finding a case proved, the NCC has wide powers to impose disciplinary sanctions including warnings and reprimands, suspension, withholding or withdrawing endorsement as a candidate or prospective candidate, and expulsion.
Appendix 6 sets out the procedure to be followed in NCC cases. In broad outline, the NCC appoints a panel, usually of three NCC members, and convenes a full hearing at which a member, referred to as the “presenter”, presents the case against the respondent. Formal charges, the respondent's answer to the charges, and the evidence to be relied on by both parties are exchanged in writing in advance of the hearing. The presenter and the respondent present their respective cases and can be questioned by the other and the panel. Further, the panel may allow other witnesses to give oral evidence. Closing statements are then made and the panel adjourns to consider its decision. If a finding of misconduct is made, the panel hears mitigation before again adjourning to determine the appropriate disciplinary action. Any decision of the NCC in disciplinary matters is final.
Paragraph 6D(i) of Appendix 6 provides:
“The rules under which the NCC operates make it clear that the NCC and its panels are concerned only with the charge(s). The procedures adopted on behalf of the Party … in advance of a referral to the NCC are not matters for the NCC dealing with a particular case. The NCC is entitled to (and will) act on the basis that the charges are properly brought before them and cannot become embroiled in dealing with complaints about the administration of any investigation leading to the charges. Any such complaint will therefore not be entertained by the NCC or panel thereof unless it is material or relevant to the consideration of the evidence to be used by the presenter in support of the charges.”
Accordingly, disciplinary matters are dealt with at national level as follows:
15.1 Disciplinary charges are initially considered by the NEC. The member against whom the charge is brought may be suspended pending the determination of the matter.
15.2 Upon considering an investigation report, the NEC may take no action, refer the case to the NCC or issue a written warning.
15.3 There is no right of appeal from the NEC's decision.
15.4 Unless there is no case to answer, the NCC deals with cases rather more formally at inter partes hearings at which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anna Rothery v David Evans (Sued on behalf of all other members of the Labour Party except the Claimant)
...with the rules, including the obligation to operate its powers within those rules fairly.” 157 Finally, in Williamson v Formby [2019] EWHC 2639 (QB), Pepperall J considered the applicability of both express terms within the Rule Book and implied terms. At paragraph 23 he set out the approa......
-
Diana Neslen v David Evans (sued as a representative of all members of the Labour Party except the Claimants)
...express term covers much of the territory of what might otherwise be the subject of an implied term or terms: Williamson v Formby [2019] EWHC 2639 (QB), [24]. Whether an aspect of the express Chapter 2, Clause II.7 duty or as a result of an implied term, where a power or discretion is conf......