Bureaucracy, national security and access to justice. New light on Duncan v Cammell Laird
Spencer, Maureen P. (2004) Bureaucracy, national security and access to justice. New light on Duncan v Cammell Laird. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 55 (3). pp. 277-302. ISSN 0029-3105
- Published Version
Restricted to Repository staff and depositor only
Official URL: http://www.law.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofLaw/Resea...
This item is available in the Library Catalogue
The conventional view of 'Duncan v Cammell Laird' was succinctly expressed by Wade and Forsyth. "The case", they wrole: "is a good example of the most genuine type where it seems plain that the interests of litigants must be sacrificed in order to preserve secrets of state." To Zuckerman Duncan was "the most outstanding" example of a rare number of cases genuinely involving national security. These, along with almost all other commentators, argue that national security considerations meant that the 1942 decision was on its facts pretty well inevitable and probably correct. This article suggests thal the view that the plaintiffs had to take second place to the greater good of keeping Germany in ignorance of British naval secrets perpetuates a myth. This myth was fostered by civil sewice lawyers in the interesis of litigation management by the Crown. The case papers tell a different story.
|Research Areas:||Middlesex University Schools and Centres > School of Law > Law and Politics|
|Deposited On:||24 Oct 2008 15:34|
|Last Modified:||01 Dec 2014 14:09|
Repository staff only: item control page
Full text downloads (NB count will be zero if no full text documents are attached to the record)
Downloads per month over the past year