Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.
R (Bridges) -v- CC South Wales & ors
(2) The duty must be exercised in substance, with rigour, and with an open mind. It is
not a question of ticking boxes.
(3) The duty is non-delegable.
(4) The duty is a continuing one.
(5) If the relevant material is not available, there will be a duty to acquire
it and this will frequently mean that some further consultation with
appropriate groups is required.
(6) Provided the court is satisfied that there has been a rigorous
consideration of the duty, so that there is a proper appreciation of the
potential impact of the decision on equality objectives and the
desirability of promoting them, then it is for the decision-maker to
decide how much weight should be given to the various factors
informing the decision.
176.
We accept (as is common ground) that the PSED is a duty of process and not outcome.
That does not, however, diminish its importance. Public law is often concerned with
the process by which a decision is taken and not with the substance of that decision.
This is for at least two reasons. First, good processes are more likely to lead to better
informed, and therefore better, decisions. Secondly, whatever the outcome, good
processes help to make public authorities accountable to the public. We would add, in
the particular context of the PSED, that the duty helps to reassure members of the
public, whatever their race or sex, that their interests have been properly taken into
account before policies are formulated or brought into effect.
177.
This is reinforced by the background to the enactment of the PSED. That background
is to be found in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report in 1999, which led to the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. That Act introduced a new section 71 into the Race
Relations Act 1976, to replace an earlier version which had applied only to local
authorities. The provision has since been expanded to embrace other protected
characteristics and now finds its place in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
178.
The background is explained by Karon Monaghan QC in Equality Law (2nd ed., 2013),
at para. 16.06:
“The first of the modern equality duties was found again in
section 71 of the RRA, but following amendments made to it by
the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 (enacting the
General Race Equality Duty). The General Race Equality Duty
in the amended section 71 of the RRA required that listed public
authorities had ‘due regard’ to the need ‘to eliminate unlawful
racial discrimination’ and ‘to promote equality of opportunity
and good relations between persons of different racial groups’.
The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and the General
Race Equality Duty within it were enacted to give effect to the
recommendations in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report and
the Inquiry’s findings of ‘institutional racism’. The purpose of
the General Race Equality Duty was to create a strong, effective,