- 5 -
In that position he was held bound to give guidance
aimed at achieving the objectives laid down rather than
conflicting with them. The guidance had to be "intra
vires" the objectives if it was to help achieve them.
If the objectives or any of them were to be overruled,
it could only be done by direction under Section 4.
It is for this very reason, as we understand it, that
Government seeks a direction in this case.
10.
That is not to say that the Secretary of
State has unlimited power to give a direction under
s.4(3). He must still act as prescribed by the Act;
he could still not purport to make a direction wider
even than the terms of the Section permit. Thus he
could not give a direction without first consulting
the Authority, and he must act in accordance with the
well established constraints which the Courts impose
on the exercise of administrative power: See Associated
Provincial Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
1 K.B. 223. Subject to these provisos however, the
Secretary of State's powers are wide indeed especially
in view of the words "any matter appearing to the
Secretary of State
"
•
see e.g. Robinson v.
Minister
of Town & Country Planning [1947] K.B.702.
11.
We now turn to consider the directions which
have been proposed.
12.
As we have stated, Government believes that
there should be two airlines offering competing services