Sections:

• Home
• ABOUT DFID
  • History
  • Mission statement
  • Ministers & organisation
  • Millennium Development Goals
  • How DFID works in the UK
  • Who DFID works with
  • Development activities
  • Performance & expenditure
  • Key achievements
  • Evaluation
  • Diversity & equality
  • Expenditure statistics
• FIGHTING POVERTY
• COUNTRY PROFILES
• NEWSROOM
• PUBLICATIONS
• CASE STUDIES
• PROCUREMENT
• CONSULTATIONS
• POLICY AND RESEARCH
• FUNDING SCHEMES
• RECRUITMENT
• DISCOVERY ZONE
• GET INVOLVED

International Development Act 2002

How To Ensure Compliance With The 2002 Act

Do I need to seek legal advice on every programme and project?

No. This guidance should enable you to ensure compliance with the Act for the vast majority of programmes and projects. If you need any additional guidance, contact DPD. Staff should not contact Treasury Solicitors directly on matters relating to the 2002 Act without first consulting DPD, except in an emergency.

What do I do if I think an existing project or programme is not compliant with the Act?

The Act only applies to commitments made after 16 June 2002. The repeal of the 1980 Act does not affect the legality of approval decisions taken under the 1980 Act prior to its repeal. However, any decision to increase funding of a project/programme approved originally under the 1980 Act must be compliant with the 2002 Act.

Does the Secretary of State need to be consulted on all spending decisions?

No. Decisions must of course be taken at the appropriate level, but it is a rule of British law that the actions or decisions of officials are treated as those of the Minister. Officials may therefore exercise powers given in legislation to the Minister.

Should I cite the Act when refusing to fund project proposals?

Care should be taken. We must avoid hiding behind the Act as an excuse to reject funding proposals. The vast majority of proposals rejected by DFID are likely to be compliant with the Act but turned down for other reasons (e.g. prioritisation). Unjustified use of the Act would undermine its credibility. If in doubt consult DPD.

Will the 2002 Act open us to more legal challenges?

Difficult to predict. There was only one challenge under the 1980 Act (the Pergau Dam case). It is possible that the greater clarity and focus of purpose in the 2002 Act may encourage civil society to test DFID spending decisions.