The decisions of University Visitors are subject to judicial review in that they exercise a public function. English law no longer draws a distinction between jurisdictional errors of law and non-jurisdictional errors of law.
However, the court has no jurisdiction to review a decision of the visitor of a University on the construction of its statues if such a decision is made within the visitors powers.
The House considered the nature and purpose of the system of judicial review: ‘The fundamental principle [of judicial review] is that the courts will intervene to ensure that the powers of public decision-making bodies are exercised lawfully. In all cases . . this intervention . . is based on the proposition that such powers have been conferred on the decision-maker on the underlying assumption that the powers are to be exercised only within the jurisdiction conferred, in accordance with fair procedures and, in a Wednesbury sense . . reasonably. If the decision-maker exercises his powers outside the jurisdiction conferred, in a manner which is procedurally irregular or is Wednesbury unreasonable, he is acting ultra vires his powers and therefore unlawfully.’ The House discarded the distinction between error of law within and outwith jurisdiction.
Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Griffiths, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Mustill, Lord Slynn of Hadley
Gazette 10-Mar-1993, [1993] 3 WLR 1112, [1993] AC 682, [1992] UKHL 12, Indepent 09-Dec-1992
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Hull University Visitor, ex parte Page CA 1991
(Orse Regina v Lord President of the Privy Council ex parte Page) The employee’s terms included two provisions, one in his letter of appointment which provided for either party to terminate on three months’ notice in writing, and one in the . .
Cited – Philips v Bury PC 1694
A university visitor, acting as a judge has exclusive jurisdiction, and his decision is final in all matters within his jurisdiction. . .
Remarks Explained – Thomas v University of Bradford HL 1987
The lecturer sought an order for the University to comply with what he understood were its own rules. The House considered the availability of a remedy of certiorari in challenging a decision of the University visitors.
Held: A university is . .
Cited – Pearlman v Keepers and Governors of Harrow School CA 14-Jul-1978
The court considered the finality of decision of a county court judge regarding the interpretation of the phrase ‘structural alteration’ in the 1974 Act. Paragraph 2 (2) of Schedule 8 provided that the determination of the county court judge ‘shall . .
Cited – In re Racal Communications Ltd; In Re a Company HL 3-Jul-1980
Court of Appeal’s powers limited to those Given
The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is wholly statutory; it is appellate only. The court has no original jurisdiction. It has no jurisdiction itself to entertain any original application for judicial review; it has appellate jurisdiction over . .
Cited by:
Cited – Boddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
Cited – Ahsan v Carter CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant sought to assert race discrimination by the Labour Party in not selecting him as a political candidate. The defendant, chairman of the party appealed.
Held: A political party when selecting candidates was not acting as a . .
Cited – Ford-Camber Ltd v Deanminster Ltd and Another CA 24-May-2007
The parties disputed the compensation for the diversion of a right of way. The right was over a service road connecting the land with the highway. If the land was acquired by the development authority under section 104, and was carried out by a . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Evans and Others v The Serious Fraud Office QBD 12-Feb-2015
evans_sfoQBD201502
The claimants had had criminal charges brought against them by the defendants. A court had ordered them discharged, but the defendant had recommenced proceedings and these second set of proceedings had also been dismissed by the court. They now . .
Cited – Regina v Visitors to the Inns of Court ex parte Calder CA 1993
Two barristers had been struck off for disciplinary offences. Their appeals were heard by three High Court judges sitting as Visitors, who dismissed the appeals. The barristers now sought judicial review of that decision.
Held: Justices . .
Cited – Majera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Education, Judicial Review, Employment, Natural Justice
Leading Case
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.187079
