Carltona Ltd v Commissioners of Works [1943] 2 All ER 560

Facts

  • The case concerned the seizure of a factory under wartime emergency regulations.
  • The seizure order was stated to be issued by the Commissioners of Works on behalf of the Minister of Works and Planning.
  • The owner of the factory challenged the order, questioning whether the minister had personally authorised the action.
  • The case raised fundamental questions about the exercise of ministerial powers and the necessity or otherwise of personal ministerial involvement.

Issues

  1. Whether a minister is required to personally exercise every power statutorily conferred upon them, or if such powers can be exercised by officials within their department.
  2. Whether actions taken by civil servants within a minister’s office can be lawfully treated as actions of the minister.
  3. What limits apply to the delegation of ministerial powers under administrative law.

Decision

  • The court held that it was not necessary for the minister personally to exercise every power granted to them by law.
  • Actions taken by officials in a minister’s department are treated as acts of the minister, provided they are made under proper legal authority.
  • Delegation of tasks to civil servants within the minister's office is lawful, reflecting the realities of large-scale government administration.
  • The principle of ministerial responsibility requires ministers to answer to Parliament for the actions taken by their department.

Legal Principles

  • The Carltona principle permits civil servants to exercise powers conferred on a minister, treating such acts as those of the minister in law.
  • Delegation is restricted to officials within the minister’s office unless legislation expressly permits delegation to outsiders.
  • Officials exercising delegated powers must remain within the legal scope granted to the minister and may not sub-delegate unless specifically allowed.
  • Ministerial accountability to Parliament remains central even where powers are exercised by officials.
  • Later case law reinforced the need for clear legal authority and proper accountability in the exercise of delegated ministerial powers.

Conclusion

The Carltona principle, as established by this case, supports the lawful delegation of ministerial powers to departmental officials, balancing efficient administrative operation with the continued accountability of ministers to Parliament. Its scope, while central to UK administrative law, continues to develop through subsequent judicial interpretation and changing governance structures.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal