Skip to content

High Court rejects Charity Commission's bid to block ombudsman reports on abuse failures

A landmark ruling exposes systemic flaws in charity oversight. How one woman's fight for accountability reshaped the regulator's duties—and why Parliament had the final say.

The image shows an aerial view of the Royal Commission on Sydney Improvement, with buildings,...
The image shows an aerial view of the Royal Commission on Sydney Improvement, with buildings, boats, and water visible. At the top and bottom of the image, there is text written on a paper.

High Court rejects Charity Commission's bid to block ombudsman reports on abuse failures

A High Court judge has ruled against the Charity Commission in its legal dispute with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). The case began in May 2025 after the ombudsman criticised the Commission's handling of safeguarding concerns. Mr Justice Fordham dismissed the claim as academic but stated it would have lacked merit even if considered.

The row stemmed from two ombudsman reports about complaints from Lara Hall and Damian Murray. These reports, published in May 2024, found that the Charity Commission had failed to act on earlier recommendations regarding sexual abuse allegations at two charities.

The ombudsman's investigation highlighted serious shortcomings in how the Charity Commission managed complaints. It concluded that the regulator had not properly addressed safeguarding concerns linked to sexual exploitation. In response, the PHSO prepared to ask MPs to intervene.

However, the Charity Commission launched legal action in May 2025 to block the reports from being laid before Parliament. This move prompted the Speaker of the House of Commons to apply to join the case, arguing that the Commission's actions may have interfered with Parliament's right to receive ombudsman findings. The reports were eventually laid before Parliament in September, following a motion by Simon Hoare, chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee.

Mr Justice Fordham's judgment clarified that the Commission's claim was without merit on the facts presented. While the case was deemed academic, legal experts noted its significance in defining the Charity Commission's duties. Axel Landin, a partner at Bindmans, stated that the ruling would help shape the regulator's responsibilities in protecting future victims of abuse.

Lara Hall, one of the complainants, was recognised for her determination in pursuing accountability. The PHSO had initially planned to involve MPs earlier, but the Commission's legal challenge caused delays.

The judgment brings closure to a dispute that began with the ombudsman's 2024 investigation. The Charity Commission's attempt to prevent the reports from reaching Parliament was ultimately unsuccessful. The ruling underscores the importance of transparency in how regulators handle serious allegations within charities.

Read also:

Latest