A LEGAL challenge over the decision not to investigate Dominic Cummings for alleged breaches of coronavirus lockdown rules was rejected by the High Court today.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s chief adviser made a controversial 260-mile drive from London to Durham in March to stay on his parents’ farm while strict travel restrictions were in place, after his wife, journalist Mary Wakefield, exhibited Covid-19 symptoms.

At an extraordinary press conference in Downing Street’s Rose Garden in May, Mr Cummings argued that his journey to Durham was to protect his family’s health.

Mr Johnson’s senior aide also said that he subsequently took a “short drive” to Barnard Castle, about 25 miles away from where he was isolating, on his wife’s 45th birthday, to test his eyesight, after it was affected by Covid-19, to “see if I could drive safely.”

Mr Cummings declined to apologise, saying that his actions were “reasonable in these circumstances,” adding: “I don’t regret what I did.”

Durham Police later said that officers had concluded “there might have been a minor breach of the regulations that would have warranted police intervention,” but did not intend to take “retrospective action.”

London resident Martin Redston sought permission to take legal action against the director of public prosecutions (DPP), Max Hill QC, over the alleged failure to investigate whether Mr Cummings breached lockdown rules.

At a hearing in London, Michael Mansfield QC said that Mr Cummings “appearing to evade any genuine scrutiny for his actions due to government associations is undermining of respect for the rule of law.”

Refusing permission to bring a legal challenge, Lady Justice Carr, sitting with Mr Justice Picken, said: “The decision in principle is that this renewed claim for permission to apply for judicial review will be refused.”

The judge added that the court’s decision for refusing permission would be provided in writing by Thursday afternoon.