IPSA chief Sir Ian Kennedy launched a bid to keep MPs' receipts private . All MPs' expenses receipts will have to be published after a court threw out a bid to keep them private. The Commons expenses watchdog, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, had launched a bid to keep MPs' original claims secret. But the Court of Appeal ruled today that it must release all the copies of receipts and invoices which have been submitted by politicians. The legal action centred on whether copies of original documents should be published - rather than a summary of the claim put in by MPs. The case stems from a Freedom of Information request to Ipsa in 2010 - just a year after the MPs' expenses scandal erupted - asking for three specific receipts submitted by politicians in support of their claims. But instead of providing the original receipts, Ipsa sent back a typed-up summary of the claims. The Information Commissioner later ruled that the receipts themselves should have been published - but Ipsa continued to fight the case. Today's ruling comes six years after the MPs expenses scandal broke - triggering the most explosive British political scandal in a generation. Voters reacted with fury at the list of extraordinary claims submitted by MPs - with jaw-dropping details of fraud, fake receipts and payouts for ornamental duck houses and moat cleaning. Yet, today's latest court ruling shows the the scandal has refused to die, six years and almost two general elections later. After dismissing the privacy appeal today, Lord Justice Richards said the receipts could still not be published in full - to give Ipsa time to appeal again to the Supreme Court. An Ipsa spokesman said after the ruling: 'We need to study the judgement carefully. The court made clear that this is an important test case with implications not just for Ipsa but for all other public bodies. 'We were right to test the point of law through an appeal to see whether images of receipts add anything additional to all the information about MPs' expenditure that we already release.' The spokesman added: 'We remain completely committed to openness and transparency and already publish a detailed breakdown of every claim made by every MP.' Lord Justice Richards said that although the appeal was concerned with three specific invoices or receipts 'it is a test case and has important implications for Ipsa and, no doubt, for other public authorities'. He said Ipsa publishes details of claims on its website but does not publish copies of the supporting invoices or receipts. In 2010 Ben Leapman, then a Sunday Telegraph reporter, made a request to Ipsa for the information contained in three such documents to be sent to him. Parliament's expenses watchdog has fought plans to keep MPs' original receipts secret - arguing that it should only have to publish a summary of their claims . The MPs expenses revealed a series of extravagant claims - including for the repair of a 'Stockholm' duck house by Tory MP Sir Peter Viggers . The judge said Ipsa responded 'with a transcript of information contained in the documents, including information additional to that published on its website, but refused to provide copies of the documents themselves'. Ipsa was set up to restore public confidence following the 2009 expenses scandal, which led to some MPs being jailed. In that same year, parliamentary authorities published more than a million receipts online - with details such as addresses and account numbers hidden. However, Ipsa decided in 2010 not to publish receipts routinely, restricting its regular releases to a summary of each claim. It said there were a number of factors which had led it to decide that there was ''insufficient public benefit'' in publishing receipts and invoices. In a letter to the Information Commissioner, it said: 'Primarily, a trial of extracting and redacting receipts and invoices for the purposes of publication showed that the cost would be in excess of £1 million for additional staffing and IT costs alone, compared to the approximate £250,000 cost under the chosen model.' It said 'on balance' it took the view that providing images of receipts or invoices would be 'disproportionate in terms of costs, insufficiently beneficial in terms of transparency and represented a higher risk in terms of data protection'.
Commons expenses watchdog launched bid to keep MPs' claims private . Court of Appeal ruled it must release all the copies of receipts submitted . It means voters will be able to check over MPs' original expenses claims .