Judicial review over Greater Manchester Police's decision on Twitter complaint

Introduction

The High Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Hill, delivered a significant judgment on 17 February 2025, addressing the procedural and substantive issues arising from a judicial review claim brought by Lynsay Watson against the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. The case centred on the police's decision not to pursue further action regarding tweets from the account @WingsScotland, which Watson alleged constituted criminal offences.

Background

Watson, representing herself, initiated the claim following the decision by Inspector Paul Mason of the Greater Manchester Police to discontinue the investigation into tweets posted between 13 and 17 February 2023. These tweets were alleged to contain criminal content, and Watson sought judicial review of the decision to take no further action.

Legal Framework

The case brought to light the application of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), particularly concerning the identification of 'interested parties' in judicial review proceedings. Under CPR 54.1(f), an interested party is defined as any person directly affected by the claim. The court examined whether the author of the tweets should be added as an interested party, given the potential implications of the judicial review outcome on their legal rights.

Arguments and Analysis

Watson argued for the inclusion of the tweet author as an interested party, acknowledging the potential impact of the proceedings on their legal status. The police, represented by Beatrice Collier, contended that the author was not directly affected under the Muldoon test, which requires that the person be affected without the intervention of any intermediate agency.

Judgment

Mrs Justice Hill determined that the author of the tweets should be recognised as an interested party, given that the remedy sought could directly affect their legal rights. The court found that the author would be the immediate subject of any further police investigation, thus meeting the criteria for being directly affected by the claim.

Implications

This decision underscores the importance of recognising individuals who may face legal consequences as interested parties in judicial review claims. The judgment aligns with previous cases where potential defendants in criminal proceedings were granted interested party status, ensuring their right to participate in the legal process.

Privacy Considerations

The court also addressed Watson's request to redact her personal details from the case papers, given her concerns about the potential disclosure of sensitive information to the tweet author. Mrs Justice Hill granted this request, balancing the principles of open justice with the need to protect the claimant's privacy.

Conclusion

The case highlights the complexities of judicial review in the context of social media and criminal allegations, setting a precedent for future cases involving similar issues. The decision to include the tweet author as an interested party reflects the evolving nature of legal proceedings in the digital age.

Learn More

For more information on data protection, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.