A freelance journalist who took a local authority to court over its withholding of public accounts has been given permission to see the council’s books.

Lincolnshire County Council agreed to release the figures to Richard Orange at the High Court, removing the need for a judicial review hearing.

The court had been asked to decide whether the council was right, under human rights and data protection legislation, to keep some details of the 2003-4 accounts to itself.

The authority had argued that it could breach its privacy obligations by allowing viewing of the accounts uncensored.

Richard had been seeking leave for a judicial review for a full hearing into the matter, but after legal discussions at the hearing, Lincolnshire County Council agreed to show the previously hidden details, which meant the reason for the hearing no longer existed.

The judge, however, said Richard was right to raise the matter and it was a point that would have to be dealt with by the courts – but not from this application.

The result means it is still unclear whether councils have the right to withhold what they see as confidential information from public accounts.

Richard, a former Lincolnshire Echo and Western Daily Press man who now runs his own press agency, said: “I went there to get this overturned and I have now been promised access to the accounts.

“I have got a result without having to go to what would be a very expensive full hearing.

“I will now have to wait to see how the council responds on future requests.

“I wanted to see if the council was right to withhold the information but the judge decided there was no need for a judicial review.”

The judge refused permission to take the matter to a full judicial review hearing.

County solicitor Charlie Adan said: “The council is totally committed to openness and transparency. It takes very seriously its legal responsibilities to make available to the public details of its activities and works hard to meet all demands for information.

“However, the council also owes a duty to individuals to protect their privacy. That duty is also enshrined in law. Judgements are continuously being made by my colleagues about how to achieve that balance. It is unfortunate whenever these issues end up in court because the costs incurred mean there is less money to spend on services.

“In this case, I am pleased that the judge felt unable to allow a challenge to the decision which had been taken. We will continue to work hard to balance these conflicting responsibilities and if anyone feels aggrieved as a result of any decision, please come and talk to us so we can try and resolve the issue without recourse to the courts.”

Back to the law index