Hazell V Hammersmith and Fulham LBC, [1992] 2 A.C
Hazell v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC, [1992] 2 A.C. 1 (1991) For educational use only *1 Hazell Appellant v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council and Others Respondents Hazell and Others Respondents v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council and Others Respondents Positive/Neutral Judicial Consideration Court House of Lords Judgment Date 24 January 1991 Report Citation [1991] 2 W.L.R. 372 [1992] 2 A.C. 1 House of Lords Lord Keith of Kinkel , Lord Brandon of Oakbrook , Lord Templeman , Lord Griffiths and Lord Ackner 1990 Oct. 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 25, 29; Nov. 5, 6, 8, 12; 1991 Jan. 24 [Conjoined Appeals] Local Government—Powers—Financial transactions—Council incorpÍorated by Royal Charter entering into speculative financial transactions—Profitability depending on interest rates falling—Whether transactions within powers of council— Whether council's capital market fund valid— London Government Act 1963 (c. 33), s. 1 — Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70), s. 111 — Local Government Finance Act 1982 (c. 32), s. 19 The council was a London borough council which, pursuant to section 1(2) of the London Government Act 1963 , 1 *2 had been incorporated by Royal Charter . During the fiscal years 1987-1988 and 1988-1989 substantial transactions of a speculative nature were conducted through a capital market fund in the name of the council with a view to making a profit. The capital market fund was established without a specific resolution of the council and the council members received no report on the transactions. For the year 1987-88 the council resolved, on the recommendation of its financial and administration committee, to borrow to meet its capital and revenue payments during the year, and authorised the director of finance to arrange and administer the council's borrowing on its behalf.
[Show full text]