Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service Prerogative. Despite an extensive publicity campaign by trade unions, the government refused to reverse its decision, instead offering affected employees the choice between £1,000 and membership of a staff association or dismissal. Those employees dismissed could not rely on an industrial tribunal, as they were not covered by the relevant employment legislation. As such, the Council of Civil Service Unions decided judicial review was the only available route. The decision to ban workers at GCHQ from trade union membership had been taken following the meeting of a select group of ministers and the prime minister rather than the full Cabinet.
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service Minister for the Civil Service. Lord Diplock said the following: Lord Roskill said the following. The courts have traditionally been unwilling to subject prerogative powers to judicial review. Judges were only willing to state whether powers existed or not, not whether they had been used appropriately. They therefore applied only the first of the Wednesbury tests; whether the use was illegal. Constitutional scholars such as William Blackstone would have considered this appropriate. The GCHQ case, therefore, was highly important; it held that the application of judicial review would be dependent on the nature of the government's powers, not their source.