---

Equality Bill [HL]

My Lords, may I deal with the point raised again by the noble Baroness, Lady O’Cathain? I suppose that I make my living out of judicial review proceedings, normally but not always on the side of the applicant; sometimes I am on the side of the public authority. I would like to give some reassurance. I have no doubt at all that the commission will be entirely subject to judicial review on all the main principles. As I understand those principles, the first is that the commission has to act within the four corners of the statute giving it power—it cannot frustrate the statutory object. For example, were the commission not to seek to promote equality but the opposite—to frustrate the operation of the Bill—that would be the first ground. That is the principle of legality. Then, if the commission were to act unfairly in any of its procedures—for example, if it were not to apply the principles of natural justice and fairness that have been part of our common law for centuries—that would be the second ground. If it were to act unreasonably or irrationally—to take leave of its senses in a legal sense—or, these days, if it were to act without a sense of proportion and use a steamroller to crack a nut, all those would be grounds for judicial review. I do not think that the purpose clause here is any barrier. It simply sets out the broad aims of the commission, but all those principles would apply. I realise that I am speaking as an advocate rather than as a noble and learned Lord, and doing so in the presence of the Lord Chancellor, who will now explain why I am completely wrong.