Foreign Office chief launches judicial review to have 'irrational' sacking over Mandelson scandal quashed - after Starmer 'refused to apologise and agree payout'

By JAMES TAPSFIELD, UK POLITICAL EDITOR Published: 10:53, 13 July 2026 | Updated: 10:57, 13 July 2026 The furious Foreign Office chief ousted by Keir Starmer amid the Peter Mandelson scandal launched a judicial review bid today. Olly Robbins announced that he has asked the courts to review his dismissal, branding the outgoing PM's actions 'irrational'. The country's former top diplomat said Sir Keir could have avoided the case if he had apologised and 'made amends for the distress and cost it has caused for me and my family'. The move, backed by the FDA union representing senior public servants, sets the stage for a major legal tussle. However, there have been rumours that Sir Olly is in talks with Andy Burnham over a shock comeback. Mandelson was granted DV status by the Foreign Office in late January 2025, under Sir Olly, despite the specialist UK Security Vetting agency advising against. Olly Robbins announced that he has asked the courts to review his dismissal, branding the outgoing PM's actions 'irrational' Keir Starmer (pictured) claimed Sir Olly was 'wrong' not to tell him the outcome of the vetting and had made a 'serious error of judgment' The ex-mandarin has insisted he was not aware Mandelson had failed checks, and accused Sir Keir of failing to understand the process.  For his part the PM claimed Sir Olly was 'wrong' not to tell him the outcome of the vetting and had made a 'serious error of judgment' that led to his dismissal this Spring.  In a statement this morning, the FDA said Sir Keir needed to admit that sacking Sir Olly was a 'mistake', based on a 'grievous misunderstanding of how the National Security Vetting (NSV) system worked and a rash response to a media story'. The organisation warned it would damage the 'core values of a professional and impartial civil service if its most senior officials can be dismissed on a Prime Ministerial whim, without even the semblance of a fair process or considered understanding of the core issue'. The ex-civil servant's submission states that Sir Keir had no authority to dismiss him, and he was under an 'obligation' not to disclose details of vetting to ministers. It argues that politicians are only allowed to know the final decision taken, to protect the privacy of those who go through the checks.  Sir Olly said: 'I bring this action reluctantly. It would have been unnecessary if the Prime Minister had simply apologised for his mistake and made amends for the distress and cost it has caused me and my family.  'Instead, I now have to ask the Courts to determine that the Prime Minister's decisions were unlawful, unreasonable and to quash them.'