Rupert Lowe, the independent MP for Great Yarmouth, is attempting to block the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS) from conducting an inquiry into his behaviour.

He is seeking to challenge the watchdog's decision at the High Court.

But on Tuesday, his attempt to temporarily stop the officials from progressing the investigation until a full hearing next month failed.

Rupert Lowe arrives at the Royal Courts of Justice in London ahead of his legal challenge against the parliamentary watchdog. (Image: Ben Whitley)

The details of the complaint remain unknown but it is understood it was made in July last year and likely will have come from either an MP, a former MP or a parliamentary staff member.

The watchdog is responsible for investigating complaints relating to bullying, harassment and/or sexual misconduct within parliament.

Mr Lowe is asking the court to quash the decision to investigate him, which came following a complaint made to the ICGS by a third party who cannot be identified.

The Royal Courts of Justice (Andrew Matthews/PA) (Image: Contributed)

The ICGS opposed Mr Lowe's attempt to block the probe, arguing that the court has no jurisdiction over the matter and that it would interfere with parliamentary privilege.

Mr Justice Chamberlain, the judge overseeing the case, ruled there was a "strong public interest in allowing a process established pursuant to resolutions of the House of Commons to take its course".

He added that any risk of harm to Mr Lowe had been “overstated”, noting it was unlikely the watchdog would make any public findings before a further hearing scheduled for March 17.

Mr Lowe's lawyers had previously said the results of the investigation could have the potential to "end his career".

Christopher Newman, who is representing Mr Lowe said that the wider legal challenge “alleges procedural unfairness in the processes of ICGS, as well as perversity and illegality”.

Sarah Hannett KC, for the ICGS, said Mr Lowe was “answerable to the House” about the allegations, and that it was not “the constitutional role of the court to supervise or interfere with that”.

A separate hearing on whether the court has jurisdiction to deal with the wider legal challenge is scheduled for March 17.

© Eastern Daily Press