Mr Justice Green concluded that Mr Hunt had approved the contract but had not compelled employers to adopt it.The judge said the decision was sufficiently clear and was not irrational.Justice for Health – founded by Dr Nadia Masood, Dr Ben White, Dr Fran Silman, Dr Amar Mashru and Dr Marie-Estella McVeigh – said Mr Hunt’s decision to impose the contract lacked a sound or rational foundation and should be quashed.Speaking after the judgement was issued, Saimo Chahal QC, who represents the campaign group, said they were “thrilled” to have established beyond doubt that the Health Secretary did not have the legal power to impose the contract.She said that, given junior doctors were not legally bound to accept the contact, they were free to negotiate on terms and conditions. The contract will begin to be introduced in NHS hospitals from next Wednesday. The litigation follows opposition to Mr Hunt’s plans for seven-day NHS services in England.Junior doctors began strikes, the longest of which has lasted two days, in January. Want the best of The Telegraph direct to your email and WhatsApp? Sign up to our free twice-daily Front Page newsletter and new audio briefings. We must now move on from this dispute to the crucial job of making sure patients get the same high standards of urgent and emergency care every day of the weekDepartment of Health spokesman Ben White, from Justice for Health said the judgement meant NHS trusts were now free to negotiate terms and conditions with junior doctors, and could change the contract. He said the judgement established that: “Mr Hunt is not imposing a contract. He never was.”Mr White said NHS trusts were now “free from the shackles” of Mr Hunt to do as they thought best. However, the NHS is due to introduce the new national terms from next week. Chris Hopson, chief executive of NHS Providers, which represents England’s hospitals. said“This has been a very difficult time for junior doctors, NHS trusts and the patients who have been affected by the strikes. We hope that today’s ruling will enable the health service to draw a line under the situation and now move towards effectively introducing the new contract for junior doctors.But he said there was little chance that NHS trusts would make individual decisions to negotiate terms with their staff. Mr Hopson said: “Junior doctors have raised a number of legitimate concerns that still need to be addressed and NHS trusts will be working hard with their junior doctors to do so. In particular, those issues that are within the remit of the contract, for example the introduction of a new guardian role to each trust, need to be implemented consistently. “As for suggestions that individual trusts have a choice as to whether to introduce the new contract or not, NHS trusts tell us that they believe a single national contract offers a consistent approach that is in the best interests of patients and the wider NHS workforce. This is also the view of the NHS arms length bodies,” he said. Mr Hunt said he approved a new contract, but has not imposed it on employers or compelled them to adopt the terms.Ms Chahal said: “The case is all about what happens when loose language is used and meanings imperfectly conveyed and the very serious consequences which can flow from those words.”The words used have led to junior doctors striking and serious consequences for patients.”The key message from the judgment is this: Mr Hunt is not imposing a contract on junior doctors, he never was, he did not suggest he was, he says he never thought anyone else thought otherwise.”The Justice for Health junior doctors are thrilled to announce that they have succeeded in establishing beyond doubt that the Secretary of State for Health is not imposing the latest July 2016 contract on junior doctors.”Further, that employers of junior doctors are not legally compelled to adopt the contract and that they can continue to negotiate on terms until agreement is reached.”Without the courage and determination of the Justice for Health doctors in taking this legal challenge this position would not have been established.”A Department of Health spokesman said: “We welcome this clear decision by the judge that the Secretary of State acted entirely lawfully.”We must now move on from this dispute to the crucial job of making sure patients get the same high standards of urgent and emergency care every day of the week, which involves more than the junior doctors’ contract.”We urge the BMA to remove all threat of further industrial action so we can work constructively with junior doctors to address their wider concerns and better recognise their vital importance to the NHS.” Dr Ben White, Dr Marie-Estella McVeigh, Dr Amar Mashru, Dr Francesca Silman, Dr Nadia Masood – of Justice for Health – outside the High CourtCredit:Alexander Christie/Justice For Health The British Medical Association, which represents doctors, has suspended industrial action by junior doctors planned for October, November and December. Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has won a High Court fight with junior doctors over a staffing contract.Junior doctors had complained that Mr Hunt wrongly imposed the contract on NHS employers.Justice for Health, a group founded by five junior doctors, said Mr Hunt acted beyond the scope of his powers by compelling NHS employers to adopt the new contract.Mr Hunt had said the complaint was without substance and should be dismissed.Mr Justice Green, who analysed evidence at a High Court hearing in London last week, ruled in favour of Mr Hunt on Wednesday.