Category: Administrative

Pfizer Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 6 Nov 2002

The applicant appealed a refusal of a judicial review of the respondent’s decision to restrict the prescription of their drug Viagra. They argued that under the transparency directive, the government was obliged to carry out a public process of comparing priorities.
Held: The process of making this decision was one of allocating funds to competing needs and choosing priorities. That was essentially a political decision about the affordability of different remedies. It was not clear what sort of analysis might be given if ordered, and was not to be required as a pre-requisite of restricting prescription.

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-2002, Gazette 16-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1566

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 89/105/EEC the Transarency Directive Art 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178109

Britannic Asset Management Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Pensions Ombudsman: CA 14 Oct 2002

The Ombudsman appealed a finding that it had no jurisdiction over the respondents in their provision of administrative support for pensions schemes.
Held: A person who took an ‘act of administration concerned with the scheme’ was not necessarily a person ‘concerned with the administration of the scheme’. There are important distinctions between the kinds of persons involved with the many administrative acts, and the nature of their involvement. The mere calculation of benefits was not enough.

Judges:

Phillips MR, Chadwick Keene LLJ

Citations:

Times 22-Oct-2002, Gazette 14-Nov-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1405

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Britannic Asset Management Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Pensions Ombudsman Admn 21-Mar-2002
The Ombudsman had sought to rule on a complaint against the applicants. They said the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction.
Held: For jurisdiction the Ombudsman had to rely upon his statutory powers. Those allowed him to rule on those who were, or . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Britannic Asset Management Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Pensions Ombudsman Admn 21-Mar-2002
The Ombudsman had sought to rule on a complaint against the applicants. They said the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction.
Held: For jurisdiction the Ombudsman had to rely upon his statutory powers. Those allowed him to rule on those who were, or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Financial Services

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177481

Lillie and Reed v Newcastle City Council, Barker, Jones, Saradjian, Wardell: QBD 30 Jul 2002

The applicants sought judicial review of a report prepared for the respondent. They had been accused of child abuse whilst working as nursery assistants.
Held: The report was fundamentally flawed, and almost deliberately designed to manufacture allegations and lay blame at the feet of the claimants. It was disgraceful: ‘Consciously, after a detailed consideration of the material assembled before them, set out to misrepresent the state of the evidence available to support their joint belief that Mr Lillie and Miss Reed and other local residents were child abusers (and indeed abusers on a massive scale) and to give readers the impression that statements by parents and/or children had been corroborated by police inquiries.’
There was no substantial evidence of any abuse having taken place, and there was thorough going bad practice by the respondent and by those conducting the investigation. The damage to the claimants had been substantial and quite unjustified.
Eady J said: ‘I decided, therefore, that each Claimant was entitled to what is now generally recognised to be the maximum amount for compensatory damages in libel proceedings. I award each of them andpound;200,000. What matters primarily is that they are entitled to be vindicated and recognised as innocent citizens who should, in my judgment, be free to exist for what remains of their lives untouched by the stigma of child abuse.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Eady

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1600 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – King v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-May-2004
The defendant appealed against interim costs orders made in the claim against it for defamation.
Held: The general power of cost capping measures available to courts were available also in defamation proceedings. The claimant was being . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Seray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales QBD 23-Apr-2008
The defendant sought an order to strike out the claimant’s allegations of defamation and other torts. The defendants claimed qualified privilege in that the statements complained of were contained in a report prepared by it in fulfilment of its . .
Cited – Cairns v Modi CA 31-Oct-2012
Three appeals against the levels of damages awards were heard together, and the court considered the principles to be applied.
Held: In assessing compensation following a libel, the essential question was how much loss and damage did the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Defamation, Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174434

Laboratoire Monique Remy v Commission: ECFI 21 Mar 2002

1. The concepts of force majeure and unforeseeable circumstances contain, besides an objective element relating to abnormal circumstances unconnected with the party in question, a subjective element involving the obligation, on his part, to guard against the consequences of the abnormal event by taking appropriate steps without making unreasonable sacrifices. In particular, the party in question must pay close attention to the course of the procedure and, in particular, demonstrate diligence in order to comply with the prescribed time-limits. Thus, the concepts of force majeure and unforeseeable circumstances do not apply to a situation in which, objectively, a diligent and prudent person would have been able to take the necessary steps before the expiry of the period prescribed for instituting proceedings. (see para. 17)
2. The fact that the Commission does not refer, in a measure, to the possibility of starting judicial proceedings and/or of lodging a complaint with the European Ombudsman, in accordance with Article 230 EC or Article 195 EC, is a breach of the obligations which that institution has taken upon itself by its adoption of the Code of good administrative behaviour for staff of the European Commission in their relations with the public which is set out in the Annex to the Rules of Procedure of the Commission. (see para. 25)
3. The concept of excusable error, the direct source of which is a concern for observance of the principles of legal certainty and of the protection of legitimate expectations, can concern only exceptional circumstances in which, in particular, the conduct of the institution concerned was, either alone or to a decisive extent, such as to give rise to a pardonable confusion in the mind of a party acting in good faith and exercising all the diligence required of a normally prudent person. Although such may be the case where the commencement of an action out of time is caused by the provision, by the institution concerned, of wrong information creating pardonable confusion in the mind of such a person, or where the breach by the institution concerned of certain of its rules of procedure, such as, for example, a code of behaviour, has created such confusion, it cannot be the case, where the person concerned cannot harbour any doubt that the measure notified to him is in the nature of a decision. Indeed, in the latter case, the absence of information relating to the possibility of an appeal cannot in any way mislead that person.(see para. 30)

Citations:

T-218/01, [2002] EUECJ T-218/01

Links:

Bailii

European, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.173934

Partex v Commission T-182/96: ECFI 16 Sep 1999

ECJ 1 In so far as a Member State confirms the accuracy of the facts and accounts in final payment claims in respect of a grant of financial assistance from the European Social Fund (ESF), it is responsible to the Commission for the certifications which it submits.
Furthermore, given that Member States are under an obligation, pursuant to Article 2(2)of Decision 83/516 on the tasks of the ESF, to guarantee the successful completion of the operations financed, any certification under Article 5(4)of Regulation No 2950/83 on the implementation of Decision 83/516 must be regarded as being by nature an operation carried out by Member States subject to all reservations. A different interpretation would undermine the effectiveness of Article 7 of Decision 83/673 on the management of the ESF, which requires Member States to give notice of irregularities found in the management of operations to be financed through the ESF. In addition, the Commission may, under Article 7(1)of Regulation No 2950/83, check final payment claims, `without prejudice to any controls carried out by the Member States’. Those obligations and powers on the part of the Member States are not limited by any restriction in time. Consequently, where a Member State has already certified the accuracy of the facts and accounts in the final payment claim, it may still alter its assessment of the final payment claim if it considers that this contains irregularities which had not been previously detected.
2 The obligation, laid down in Article 190 of the Treaty (now Article 253 EC), to state the reasons for an individual decision is intended to provide the person concerned with sufficient information to enable him to determine whether the decision is well founded or whether it is vitiated by an error which may permit its validity to be contested, and to enable the Community judicature to review the lawfulness of the decision. A decision reducing the amount of ESF assistance initially granted must, in view of the serious consequences for the recipient, either show clearly the grounds justifying that reduction or refer with sufficient clarity to a measure of the competent national authorities in the Member State concerned, in which the reasons for such a reduction are clearly set out.
3 As regards the time which elapses between the lodging of a final payment claim by the national authority responsible for matters concerning ESF funding and the Commission’s adoption of a decision in relation to that claim, the question whether that time-gap is reasonable must be determined in relation to the particular circumstances of each individual case. In particular, it is necessary to take account of its context, the various procedural stages followed, the complexity of the case and its importance for the various parties involved.
4 A measure is tainted by misuse of powers only if it appears, on the basis of objective, relevant and consistent factors, to have been taken with the exclusive purpose, or at least the primary purpose, of achieving an end other than that stated or of evading a procedure specifically prescribed by the Treaty for dealing with the circumstances of the case.

Citations:

[1999] EUECJ T-182/96

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.173289

Lisrestal and others v Commission: ECFI 6 Dec 1994

1. The delegation of authority to sign within an institution is a measure relating to the internal organization of the Community’ s administrative departments. It is in accordance with Article 27 of the Commission’ s Rules of Procedure and is the normal means by which the Commission exercises its powers. Officials may therefore be empowered to take, in the name of the Commission and subject to its control, clearly defined measures of management or administration.
2. Respect for the rights of the defence in all proceedings which are initiated against a person and are liable to culminate in a measure adversely affecting that person is a fundamental principle of Community law which must be guaranteed, even in the absence of any specific rules concerning the proceedings in question. That principle requires that any person who may be adversely affected by the adoption of a decision should be placed in a position in which he may effectively make known his views on the evidence against him which the Commission has taken as the basis for the decision at issue.
That is so in the case of recipients of European Social Fund assistance for a vocational training operation in a Member State, where the Commission proposes to reduce the assistance initially granted on the ground that it has not been used in accordance with the conditions laid down in the decision of approval. The fact that the Member State concerned is the sole interlocutor of the ESF and the addressee of any decision to reduce assistance does not preclude there being a direct link between the Commission and the recipient of the assistance, which is directly affected by the economic consequences of the reduction, since it has primary liability for the repayment of the sums paid without warrant.
Consequently, it is an infringement of the recipient’ s rights of defence for a decision to reduce assistance to have been adopted when the recipient had not been notified of the reports of the Commission’ s inquiry into the conditions in which the assisted training operations were being carried out, or the Commission’ s complaints against it, and had not been heard by the Commission before it adopted the decision, and where having been invited by the Commission to submit its observations on the proposed reduction, the national authority in charge of supervising the relevant matters informed the Commission, without first hearing the recipient, that it would accept that decision.
3. A Commission decision reducing financial assistance from the European Social Fund initially granted for a vocational training operation, which has serious consequences for the recipient organization, must clearly show the grounds which justify a reduction of the amount of assistance initially authorized. The requirement to state reasons laid down in Article 190 of the Treaty is not satisfied when a decision to reduce assistance relating to various operations carried out by different organizations does not identify, with respect to each of them, the items to which the reduction relates and clearly state the reasons which led the Commission to reduce, for each of them, the assistance granted.

Judges:

R Schintgen, P

Citations:

T-450/93, [1994] EUECJ T-450/93

Links:

Bailii

European, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172681

Williams v Court of Auditors of the European Communities: ECFI 10 Dec 1992

ECJ 1. The action before the Court, even if formally directed against the rejection of the official’ s complaint, has the effect of bringing before the Court the decision adversely affecting the applicant against which the complaint was submitted. 2. The fact that in the staff reports, under the heading ‘Knowledge required for post occupied’, two officials occupying comparable posts receive identical assessments even though only one of them has specific training corresponding to the duties performed does not, in the absence of other factors, constitute proof of an infringement of the principle of equal treatment. The evaluation of the knowledge required for the post occupied calls for a specific assessment, taking account of all the actual knowledge of the official concerned, in particular his specific knowledge corresponding to the post which he occupies, not an abstract assessment of the level of his training, purely in terms of his qualifications and diplomas. 3. It is not for the Court to determine whether the assessment made by the administration in the context of a staff report of the occupational ability of an official is well founded when it involves complex value judgments which, by their very nature, are not capable of objective proof. However, the Court is required to carry out a review concerning any irregularities of form or procedure, manifest errors of fact vitiating the assessments made by the administration and any misuse of power. 4. The freedom of trade union activity recognized under Article 24a of the Staff Regulations means not only that officials have the right without hindrance to form associations of their choosing, but also that those associations are free to do anything lawful to protect the interests of their members as employees, in particular by means of bringing court proceedings. Furthermore, the Community institutions, and the bodies treated as such for the application of the Staff Regulations of Officials by virtue of Article 1 thereof, must refrain from doing anything which might impede the freedom of trade union activity recognized by Article 24a of the said regulations. 5. Where an internal directive of an institution concerning the reports procedure, such as a guide to staff reports, provides that the official assessed must be put in a position to state his point of view regarding all the information on the basis of which the appeal assessor adopts his final decision, a reports procedure in which that rule has been disregarded is irregular and the staff report subsequently adopted must be annulled.

Citations:

T-33/91, [1992] EUECJ T-33/91

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172481

Lilian R Khouri v Commission of the European Communities (Rec 1992,p II-2637): ECFI 18 Dec 1992

1. Where the application of a rule of the Staff Regulations depends on the application of a legal rule applying in the legal system of one of the Member States, it is in the interest of the sound administration of justice and proper application of the Staff Regulations that the review by the Court of First Instance should also extend to an examination of the way in which the appointing authority of a Community institution has interpreted the national law of one of the Member States. 2. Under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, the treatment, as a dependent child, of a person whom an official has a legal responsibility to maintain and whose maintenance involves heavy expenditure constitutes an exceptional step. The condition that the official must have a legal responsibility to maintain a person other than a dependent child must for that reason be interpreted strictly. The concept of ‘a legal responsibility to maintain’ used in the Staff Regulations is derived from the legal systems of the Member States, which, under their laws, impose a mutual obligation to provide maintenance on relatives by blood and/or marriage of a greater or lesser degree of proximity. That concept must therefore be understood as referring exclusively to an obligation of maintenance imposed on an official by a source of law independent of the will of the parties and as excluding maintenance obligations of a contractual, moral or compensatory nature. Since neither Community law nor the Staff Regulations provide the Community court with any guide as to how it should define, by way of independent interpretation, the meaning and scope of the concept of a legal responsibility to maintain entitling an official to receive a dependent child allowance under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, it is necessary to determine whether the national legal system to which the official in question is subject imposes such a responsibility on the official. 3. The terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the laws of the Member States for the purpose of de?ermining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent interpretation which must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the relevant rules. In the absence of an express reference to the laws of the Member States, the application of Community law may sometimes necessitate reference to the laws of the Member States where the Community court cannot identify in Community law or in the general principles of Community law criteria enabling it to define the meaning and scope of such a provision by way of independent interpretation.

Citations:

T-85/91, [1992] EUECJ T-85/91

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172530

Tagaras v Court of Justice: ECFI 7 Feb 1991

(Rec 1991,p II-53) 1. In a case where reclassification is requested the decision appointing a person as a probationary official – which must be in writing, must have been taken by the appointing authority, must specify the date on which the appointment takes effect, and must assign the official to a post – is to be seen as the act adversely affecting the official. That is the decision which defines the duties for which the official has been appointed and definitively fixes the corresponding grade.
2. The principle of legal certainty, which forms part of Community law, requires that every measure of the administration having legal effects must be clear and precise and must be drawn to the attention of the person concerned in such a way that he can ascertain exactly the time at which the measure comes into being and starts to produce its legal effects, particularly as regards the period allowed for bringing an action to challenge it.
3. Although an official is entitled to request the appointing authority to reconsider his classification, in order to encourage an amicable settlement of the dispute between himself and the administration by allowing the administration to review its position, that option does not have the effect of allowing him to set aside the time limits laid down in the Staff Regulations for lodging a complaint and for applying to the Court.
An application lodged before the expiry of the period allowed for a reply to the complaint against the implied decision of rejection is premature and hence inadmissible.
4. The appointing authority has a wide discretion, within the limits laid down by the second paragraph of Article 32, to allow additional seniority in step on recruiting an official, in order to take account of the training and previous experience of the person concerned, both as regards the nature and the duration of that experience and its relationship, be it close or otherwise, to the requirements of the post to be filled.
The training and special experience in question should be appraised as at the time of appointment as a probationary official.
5. There is a breach of the principle of equal treatment laid down in Article 5(3) of the Staff Regulations when two categories of person whose factual and legal circumstances disclose no essential difference are treated differently at the time of their recruitment
The same is true where situations which are different are treated in an identical manner

Citations:

T-18/89, [1991] EUECJ T-18/89

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172306

Heinz-Jurg Moritz v Commission of the European Communities: ECFI 13 Dec 1990

EU 1. Officials – Actions – Time-limits – Absolute bar – Examination of Court’s own motion (Staff Regulations, Art. 91) 2. Officials – Action – Periodic report – Prior administrative complaint -Optional (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) 3. Officials – Assessment – Periodic report – Drawing up of report -Lateness – Delay partly attributable to the official (Staff Regulations, Art. 43) 1. Since time-limits for bringing actions are mandatory and form an absolute bar, it is for the Court to examine, even of its own motion, whether they have been complied with. 2. The making of a formal complaint, within the meaning of Article 90 of the Staff Regulations, is not a necessary pre-condition for the bringing of an action if the action concerns a periodic report. In the absence of a complaint, the period of three months for bringing an action laid down in Article 91(3) of the Staff Regulations begins to run from the day on which the periodic report that may be considered final was notified to the official concerned. 3. An official cannot complain of delay in the drawing up of his periodic report and claim non-material damage in that regard if the delay was attributable to him, at least in part, or if he contributed considerably to the delay.

Citations:

T-20/89, [1990] EUECJ T-20/89

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172308

Wooder, Regina (on the Application of) v Feggetter and Dr Grah: CA 25 Apr 2002

The patient challenged the treatment given to him against his will as a detained mental patient. He said the opinion of the second doctor as required under the Act, had not been put into writing.
Held: Following Wilkinson, which allowed a challenge to such decisions, it was inevitable that a written opinion would be required from the second doctor. Otherwise the challenge would not be possible. The duty did not go so far as to require disclosure of the request to the second doctor for that opinion.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Brooke and Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 28-May-2002, Gazette 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 554, [2003] QB 219

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 53

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Wilkinson) v Broadmoor Special Hospital and Others CA 22-Oct-2001
A detained mental patient sought to challenge a decision by his RMO that he should receive anti-psychotic medication, despite his refusal to consent, and to challenge a certificate issued by the SOAD.
Held: Where a mental patient sought to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 25-Nov-2008
The claimant appealed refusal of leave to bring judicial review of decisions to sell arms to the Israeli state. He lived in Palestine and said that Israel had destroyed his farm, and that licences broke the criteria under the 2002 Act. He said that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Administrative

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171225

Regina (Persey and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 15 Mar 2002

The applicants sought an order that the government enquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak should be held in public. They argued that the need to re-establish public faith made a decision not to hold the enquiries in public irrational, and that a failure to hold the enquiry in public infringed the applicant’s human rights.
Held: The distinction between freedom of expression, and of access to information was central. Art 10 created no obligation to provide a public forum for discussion of issues. On the question of whether there is a presumption that an inquiry would be held in public (Wagstaff), this must be approached on a case by case basis with no presumption either way.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown and Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

Times 28-Mar-2002, Gazette 23-May-2002, [2002] EWHC 371 (Admin), [2003] QB 794, [2002] 3 WLR 704

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Wagstaff etc QBD 31-Aug-2000
The Secretary of State announced a public enquiry into the Shipman case. He did not say whether it would be a public enquiry. The bereaved families and media wanted it to be public, and contended that it had been invalidly constituted, that an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Administrative, Agriculture, Information, Judicial Review, Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168069

T and others v Mental Health Review Tribunal and G: Admn 22 Feb 2002

The applicant’s former partner, G, had been detained under the Act. She had obtained an injunction to keep him away, but whilst exercising staying contact with her child, he had killed his own parents, and was now detained. The tribunal had ordered his conditional release. She sought a copy of the decision, and now sought judicial review of the refusal to supply a copy. An order had been made that the tribunal should place a note of her views among the hearing papers, and one was sent, but was not so considered.
Held: The tribunal argued that the tribunal’s activities were patient centered, not victim centered. It had never exercised its discretion to publicise a decision to a third party. The claimant argued the tribunal as a creature of statute had no jurisdiction beyond its statutory powers. Although she had no reason to be told of some elements, it might be that she should know of a condition as to residence, but not other matters such as the assessment of the risk he now presented. The tribunal had a discretion which it had failed to exercise. It should reconsider the decision as to the making of information available to the claimant and in the express light of her letter.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 247 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 37 41, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12, Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983 (S.I 1983 No. 942) 21(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pickering v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Newspapers plc HL 1991
Damages were awarded for a breach of statutory duty where the claimant had suffered loss or damage by reason of the breach. The publication at issue went beyond reporting and ‘it reached deeply into the substance of the matter which the court had . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Administrative, Information

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168038

London Regional Transport, London Underground Limited v Mayor of London Transport for London: CA 24 Aug 2001

The claimants sought an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from publishing a report in breach of a contractual duty of confidence. This was granted but then discharged on the defendant undertaking only to publish a redacted version. On an application for permission to appeal, it was alleged that Sullivan J had wrongly conducted a balancing exercise that had regard to the requirements of Article 10 of the Convention notwithstanding that the publication was in breach of contractual obligations of confidence. The claimants had argued that because of a contractual confidentiality agreement the court had no option but to grant the injunction. The defendants had relied, successfully, on the argument that if, which was not admitted, publication of the redacted report would breach the confidentiality agreement, the injunction should none the less be set aside because of the strong public interest in the content of the report. Sullivan J had held that the public interest required the report to be published in it redacted form, even if an exceptional case had to be made for breaching the contractual duty of confidence. He held that the case was exceptional: ‘…this is not a case where some employee is seeking to pass confidential information to someone else for commercial gain, or where someone is trying to use confidential material to steal a march on a commercial rival. What the defendants seek to do is to disclose matters which are of genuine public concern…this is a most exceptional case. It could not properly be described as the normal run-of-the-mill breach of confidence case, whether it is in breach of an implied duty of confidence or an express duty of confidence contained in an agreement…’
Held: The court rejected the submission that a duty of confidence carried greater weight if it was contractual: ‘No authority has been cited to the court establishing that an apparent breach of a contractual duty of confidence is more serious, and is to be approached differently (as regards injunctive relief) than other apparent reaches the court adopts the same approach to both.’ (Walker LJ) The respondent argued that the judge had applied too stringent a test in requiring them to demonstrate that there was an exceptional case for publication. The court held that on the test applied by the judge his conclusions were amply justified.
Sedley J held that Convention rights introduced by the Human Rights Act lent force to Robert Walker LJ’s conclusion. Applying a test of proportionality furnished a more certain guide to the exercise of the court’s discretion than ‘the test of a reasonable recipient’s conscience’. The effect of section 3(1) of the Act was ‘…in the absence of any meaningful threatened breach of confidentiality, that it is unlawful by virtue of section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 for either claimant to seek, whether by contract or lawsuit, to interfere with Article 10 rights – whether those of the defendant or those of the public’.
Aldous LJ said that, although the hearing had been of an application for permission to appeal, as the court had heard full argument ‘we regard our judgments as making a modest extension to the law’.

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Aldous LJ, Robert Walker LJ

Citations:

[2003] EMLR 4, [2001] EWCA Civ 1491

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Greater London Authority Act 1999 210, European Convention on Human Rights 10(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v London Underground Ltd and Another, ex parte Transport for London QBD 30-Jul-2001
The Act gave the power to the government to override the policy of the Mayor of London and the Transport for London authority, and to enter into private partnerships for the management of the underground system by the private sector. Although the . .
Cited – Saltman Engineering Co v Campbell Engineering Co Ltd CA 1948
The plaintiffs instructed the defendant to make tools for the manufacture of leather punches in accordance with drawings which the plaintiffs provided to the defendant for this purpose. The defendant used the drawings to make tools, and the tools to . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina v London Underground Ltd and Another, ex parte Transport for London QBD 30-Jul-2001
The Act gave the power to the government to override the policy of the Mayor of London and the Transport for London authority, and to enter into private partnerships for the management of the underground system by the private sector. Although the . .
Cited – Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd QBD 7-Feb-2006
The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical . .
Cited – Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd QBD 7-Feb-2006
The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical . .
Cited – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Contract, Local Government, Information, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167766

Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 21 Feb 2002

The applicant had been convicted in 1990 of conspiracy to cause explosions. He had been arrested by means of an unlawful eviction from Zimbabwe, and his appeal had been successful after ten years in prison. He now appealed against a refusal to award him compensation for his imprisonment, and said that the provision of ex gratia payments only infringed his human rights.
Held: The Appeal had succeeded not for any doubt about the accuracy of the finding, but rather as to the propriety of the conviction, but certainty of guilt cannot displace the essence abuse of process, namely the degradation of the lawful administration of justice. That the appeal succeeded was an exercise of discretion, not a revelation of a miscarriage of justice. The Home Secretary was not an independent tribunal for making such a decision. However the Secretary merely applied the findings of the court, and did not himself have discretion. There had been no legitimate expectation created, and nor was there any inconsistency between the allowing of the appeal, and the refusal of compensation. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-2002, Gazette 28-Mar-2002, 2002] EWHC 230 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 1857

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 133, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 14(6), European Convention on Human Rights Seventh Protocol Art 3

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Dec-2002
The applicant had been unlawfully taken from Zimbabwe, then tried and sentenced in the UK. His conviction was set aside as unsafe, but he had been refused damages. He appealed.
Held: There was no substantial criticism of the trial itself, but . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Dec-2002
The applicant had been unlawfully taken from Zimbabwe, then tried and sentenced in the UK. His conviction was set aside as unsafe, but he had been refused damages. He appealed.
Held: There was no substantial criticism of the trial itself, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Damages, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167664

Secretary of State for the Home Department v International Transport Roth Gmbh and others: CA 22 Feb 2002

The Appellant had introduced a system of fining lorry drivers returning to the UK with illegal immigrants hiding away in their trucks. The rules had been found to be in breach of European law and an interference with their human rights. The penalties were substantial, though there existed a system of appeals.
Held: The principle that the punishment must fit the crime was irreconcilable with the notion of a substantial fixed penalty. The system was incompatible with the respondents’ article 6 human rights. As to the rights under the European treaty, not every breach of the Convention affecting cross- border trade and services involved an impermissible restriction on Treaty rights. Here the effects of cross-border trade were at best only tenuously established, and that part of the appeal succeeded. Simon Brown LJ ‘. . . the court’s role under the 1998 Act is as the guardian of human rights. It cannot abdicate this responsibility. . . But judges nowadays have no alternative but to apply the Human Rights Act 1998. Constitutional dangers exist no less in too little judicial activism as in too much. There are limits to the legitimacy of executive or legislative decision-making, just as there are to decision-making by the courts.’
Laws LJ dissenting set out the following tests of the deference which the judicial arm of government should show to the other arms of government: (1) greater deference is to be paid to an Act of Parliament than to a decision of the executive or subordinate measure; (2) there is more scope for deference ‘where the Convention itself requires a balance to be struck, much less so where the right is stated in terms which are unqualified’ (per Lord Hope in ex parte Kebilene); (3) greater deference will be due to the democratic powers where the subject-matter in hand is peculiarly within their constitutional responsibility, and less when it lies more particularly within the constitutional responsibility of the courts; (4) greater or less deference will be due according to whether the subject matter lies more readily within the actual or potential expertise of the democratic powers or the courts). ‘The first duty of government is the defence of the realm. It is well settled that executive decisions dealing directly with matters of defence, while not immune from judicial review (that would be repugnant to the rule of law), cannot sensibly be scrutinised by the courts on grounds relating to their factual merits . . ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Laws, And, Lord Justice Jonathan Parker

Citations:

Times 26-Feb-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 158, [2002] 3 WLR 344, [2003] QB 728

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, European Convention on Human Rights Art 6, EC Treaty 28 49

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – International Transport Roth GmbH and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 5-Dec-2001
The respondent introduced rules imposing fixed and penalties on HGV drivers coming into the UK who were found to have stowaway illegal entrants. The operators sought judicial review.
Held: The penalty was in the character of a criminal . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others CA 11-Apr-2003
The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and . .
Cited – Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-life Alliance HL 15-May-2003
The Alliance was a political party seeking to air its party election broadcast. The appellant broadcasters declined to broadcast the film on the grounds that it was offensive, being a graphical discussion of the processes of abortion.
Held: . .
Cited – European Roma Rights Centre and others v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and Another CA 20-May-2003
A scheme had been introduced to arrange pre-entry clearance for visitors to the United Kingdom by posting of immigration officers in the Czech Republic. The claimants argued that the system was discriminatory, because Roma visitors were now . .
Cited – Trailer and Marina (Leven) Limited v The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, English Nature QBD 6-Feb-2004
The claimant owned land which contained a canal. After disuse it had become subject an order declaring it a site of special scientific intrest. The owner complained that this removed his right to develop uses of the land and infringed his human . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – British American Tobacco UK Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Admn 5-Nov-2004
The claimants challenged the validity of regulations restricting cigarette advertisements, saying that greater exceptions should have been allowed, and that the regulations infringed their commercial right of free speech.
Held: The Regulations . .
Cited – A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
Cited – Mbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Cited – Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Secretary of State for Education and Skills Admn 16-Nov-2006
The various applicants sought judicial review of the operation of the Protection of Vulnerable Adults List insofar as they had been placed provisionally on the list, preventing them from finding work. One complaint was that the list had operated . .
Cited – Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department QBD 29-Aug-2014
The claimant challenged fines imposed on him after three illegal immigrants were found to have hidden in his lorry in the immigration control zone at Dunkirk. The 1999 At was to have been amended by the 2002 Act, and the implementation was by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Administrative, European, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167653

Mason, Wood, McClelland, Tierney v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2002

The appellants appealed their convictions on two grounds. First the judge who had heard the case was an acquaintance of the chief constable of the investigating force, and second evidence had been admitted of tape recordings of non-privileged conversations between defendants whilst in the police station. The Chief Constable had authorised the covert operation, and his evidence was subject to challenge.
Held: The judge had properly disclosed his acquaintance with the Chief Constable. He had sought advice from the Senior Presiding Judge after objection was taken, and would keep the question under review.
When testing for bias, the court should ask whether in all the circumstances a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased. In this case there was no reason to suspect bias.,br /.As to the tapes, the general approach is not necessarily to exclude evidence because it has been obtained in a way which is contrary to law or contrary to rules contained in the Codes of Practice under PACE. In this case PACE had not been complied with, since other methods of investigation had not been properly tried. The 2000 Act had changed the law, but such tapes would have been admissible before the Act. There was no sufficient unfairness to justify exclusion under PACE. The judge had given a direction about the failure of the defendants to give evidence without allowing either counsel to make submissions, and had erred. The direction should normally follow the Judicial Studies Board guidelines, however in this case, the departure made no difference. Appeal denied.
Lord Woolf said: ‘paragraph 4.3 of a draft code of practice [to be issued under s.71 of RIPA] indicates that a prison cell is within the definition of residential premises. We have heard no argument as to this but even if a prison cell falls within the definition, it does not follow that a police cell is necessarily residential. Further clarification is in our judgment desirable, though we recognise that the existence of RIPA has materially improved the situation and it is certainly desirable that what happens in police cells be treated as intrusive surveillance.’

Judges:

The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Mr Justice Mitchell, And, Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 385, [2002] 2 Crim App R 38

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76 78, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights 5 6 8, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 71, Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) HL 15-Jan-1999
A petition was brought to request that a judgment of the House be set aside because the wife of one their lordships, Lord Hoffmann, was as an unpaid director of a subsidiary of Amnesty International which had in turn been involved in a campaign . .
Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Cited – Regina v Bailey and Smith CACD 1993
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Plunkett and Another, Regina v CACD 13-Mar-2013
The defendants appealed against their convictions after admission of secret tape recordings made by the police in breach, said the defendants of the 2000 Act and unlawful. The recordings had been in the police van. The Crown said that this was not a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Evidence, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167613

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Zeqiri: HL 24 Jan 2002

The applicant sought to resist an order for his return to Germany, the first country of call after escaping Kosovo. He asserted that Germany was not complying with its international obligations. He said the Gashi case had created a legitimate expectation that he would not be so returned, and that therefore his application for asylum should be considered.
Held: The review was refused. In the normal way a decision maker reconsidering a decision will do so in the light of material circumstances then prevailing. The decision in Gashi was not clear cut. The denial of a legitimate expectation is a form of abuse of power. It is broader than what would be an estoppel at private law, and required that a public authority acting contrary to the representation would be acting ‘with conspicuous unfairness’. There were no reasonable grounds for believing the Secretary had made any representation that he felt that Gashi had the effect claimed.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Mackay of Clashfern Lord Hoffmann Lord Millett Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

Times 15-Feb-2002, [2002] UKHL 3, [2002] Imm AR 296, [2002] ACD 60, [2002] INLR 291

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

1990 Dublin Convention, Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 2(2), Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Rashid, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 22-Oct-2004
The claimant sought asylum, being an Iraqi Kurd. He was not told by the defendant of its policy not to require internal relocation within the Kurdish autonomous zone. The policy had been applied for the benefit of others, as was revealed only in . .
Cited – Tate and Lyle Sugars Ltd v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Another CA 3-Jun-2011
The company had developed a means of generating electricity from their excess sugar supplies, and challenged the support given to it by the respondent and in particular that the 2009 Order allowed the respondent to favour some types of energy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Judicial Review, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167439

Regina v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council, ex parte Avdic: CA 2 Jan 1996

A refugee from Bosnia moved from Kirklees to London, where she applied for accomodation as being homeless. Hammersmith accepted that she was owed a duty, but referred her back to Kirklees in September. Her solicitors then sent in more material which the LHA considered before, in January, refusing her again. The reconsideration of the case was voluntary.
Lord Justice Simon Brown (obiter): ‘In my judgment, this council went as far as it possibly could in construing section 61 in a way favourable to this appellant. By no stretch of the imagination could [the cousin’s] presence in the neighbouring borough be regarded as a family association such as to give the appellant a local connection with the respondent under section 61(1)(c). Indeed [counsel] does not so submit. . . . To my mind it is far from clear that an appellant’s claim to be housed under Part III of the 1985 Act can be improved in this fashion simply because the local authority accede to a request to review the matter, as this local authority has done after the initial decision was taken.’ Though it was unnecessary to deal definitively with the point the Lord Justice questioned whether the local authority should have acceded to the request for a review.
Simon Brown considered the nature of the authority’s residual discretion: ‘Residual Discretion. That such a discretion exists cannot be doubted. Plainly a local authority are entitled to house an applicant even if he or she has an obvious local connection with some other borough and none at all with their own. To my mind that proposition hardly needs the citation of authority, although I record that it is so stated in R v London Borough of Newham, ex p London Borough of Tower Hamlets (1993) 23 HLR 62 at 71. It should, however, be remembered that this particular legislation is concerned essentially with a local authority’s housing function rather than with their social services function. It is not to be thought that a London borough, very hard pressed as doubtless they all are in connection with their public housing stock, will very readily accept on an entirely voluntary basis a housing obligation which, by virtue of section 67, they are perfectly entitled to refer elsewhere and which, indeed some other borough expressly accepts. Nevertheless, I repeat, such a discretion exists. . . . ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Staughton

Citations:

[1996] 30 HLR 1

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 65(2) 67(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council, ex parte Avdic QBD 1996
The applicant challenged a referral of her application for housing as a homeless person by Hammersmith back to Kirklees from where she had moved. She had a cousin in Hammersmith.
Held: Her application for judical review failed. Tucker J: . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ealing London Borough Council v Surdonja etc CA 21-Jan-2000
When a local authority came to make the decision about the extent of the local connection of the homelessness applicant with the area, the assessment was to be made as regards the situation at the date of that decision. Where there was a review, the . .
Cited – Ozbek v Ispwich Borough Council CA 4-May-2006
The claimant applied to be housed as a homeless person. The authority sought to refer him to a different authority under s198. As an asylum seeker, he had been given assistance both in Portsmouth and Southampton before coming to Ipswich. He said . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.229857

Langton, Allen, Regina (on the Application of) v Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: Admn 17 Dec 2001

The claimants were farmers, who had been made subject to orders under the Act. They had accumulated maggot waste on their land. The second defendant accepted that the waste included material which would be high risk under the Directive. The defendant had entered the claimant’s land to execute works required under the notice, and the claimant argued this interfered with their property rights under the Convention. The maggot waste which had been supplied to him had included other animal wastes.
Held: Neither the Act for the Order allowed any provision for an appeal. Was judicial review a sufficient alternative remedy? Some of the significant decisions predated the Human Rights Act, and the actual procedure adopted allowed representations to be made, and for review if necessary. The Act was compliant.

Judges:

Mr Nigel Pleming QC (Sitting As A Deputy High Court Judge

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 1047

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Health Act 1981, Animal By-Products Order 1999, European Convention on Human Rights, Council Directive 90/667/EEC of 27th November 1990.

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Cited – McLellan v Bracknell Forest Borough Council; Reigate Borough Council v Benfield and Another CA 16-Oct-2001
The tenant was issued with a notice to quit for unpaid rent, within the first year, during an ‘introductory tenancy.’ She sought judicial review on the basis that the reduced security of tenure infringed her human rights.
Held: Review was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Animals, Human Rights, Judicial Review, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167368

Regina (Augustine Machi) v Legal Services Commission: CA 20 Dec 2001

The applicant was legally aided under a full certificate. He wished to continue an action despite his solicitors and counsel advising him to accept a settlement offered. The Respondent wished to consider revocation of the certificate, and instructed the solicitors to cease work until a decision had been made. This was a day or so before the trial was listed.
Held: The Commission had no power to make such a request in this way. They had acted in a procedurally unfair way to the applicant.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 15-Jan-2002, Gazette 27-Feb-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 2010, [2002] 1 WLR 983

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989 No 339), Legal Aid Act 1988 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Legal Aid

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167405

Regina (on the Application of Nahar) v The Social Security Commissioners: Admn 21 Dec 2001

A finding of fact by one government department is not necessarily binding as such on any other department. The claimant sought a pension as the widow of a British citizen. The Home Office had accepted her marriage certificate as binding, but the Benefits Directorate had rejected it as a forgery.
Held: No issue estoppel arose. There was no sufficient degree of identity between different government departments, and the minister exercised the powers in his own name, not the Crown. The department which had rejected the certificate had not been involved in the earlier finding, and the evidence upon which the two findings had been made differed.

Judges:

Justice Munby

Citations:

Times 21-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2001] EWHC Admin 1049

Links:

Bailii

Benefits, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167374

Regina (on the Application on Denis James Galligan) v the Chancellor Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford: Admn 22 Nov 2001

The applicant was director of the institute for socio-legal studies in Oxford. He made a decision to exclude a lecturer, and now challenged a decision by the University to set up an external enquiry into his decision, after an earlier decision to support the exclusion. The terms of the enquiry risked raising matters which might lead to disciplinary proceedings against the claimant.
Held: The decision had been taken under the Chancellor’s general powers and could not be described as perverse or unreasonable. The claimant would not be put at risk of disciplinary proceedings. A legitimate expectation claim required to establish just what had been promised, whether it intended to act unlawfully with regard to that commitment, and what the court should do. No claim for legitimate expectation arose.

Judges:

Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 965

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Lavelle 1983
Prerogative remedies are only available to impugn a decision of a tribunal which is performing a public duty. Judicial review is not applicable in a strict master and servant relationship based on private contract of employment as there is no . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Newham and Bibi and Al-Nashed CA 26-Apr-2001
The housing authority had mistakenly thought that it was obliged to re-house the applicants under the Act with secure accommodation, and promised them accordingly.
Held: That promise had created a legitimate expectation: ‘In all legitimate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167272

Wykeham (Trading as Knightwood Kennels) and Another v The Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: Admn 19 Nov 2001

Appeal from refusal of leave to seek judicial review of letter altering arrangements for compensation to quarantine kennels on the relaxation quarantine requirements.

Judges:

Rafferty J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 979

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Animals

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167270

Regina (on the Application of Widgery Soldiers) v Members of the Tribunal Sitting As the Bloody Sunday Inquiry: Admn 16 Nov 2001

Challenge by judicial review to a ruling of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry ruling that the soldiers and former soldiers, to give oral evidence before the Tribunal over a period of some six months should do so in Londonderry Guildhall where, hitherto, for the most part the Tribunal has sat, rather than in London or some other part of Great Britain.

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 888

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167266

Fleurose v The Securities and Futures Authority Ltd, The Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of the Securities & Futures Authority Ltd: CA 21 Dec 2001

The applicant sought to challenge a decision suspending him from authorisation to act as a financial adviser. He was alleged to have sought to affect the Index of share values in order that his company should not be liable under certain options. He said the decision was in effect a criminal decision.
Held: It was not a criminal charge. Applying the principles set out in Human Rights case law, the proceedings were not sufficiently serious to take the case to that point. Nevertheless some aspects of the right to a fair trial might apply under article 6. The appellant knew the basis of the allegation against him, and decisions made by him as to the conduct of his defence made the question of free legal representation irrelevant. Because the charge was not criminal evidence obtained under compulsion was admissible.
Schiemann LJ said: ‘It is common ground between the parties, and we are content to accept, that the Disciplinary Tribunal was involved in the determination of M Fleurose’s civil rights for the purposes of Article 6. Therefore clearly the proceedings had to be fair. We accept for present purposes, as did the judge, that it was for the SFA to prove their case, that the SFA had to inform M Fleurose in good time of the nature of the charges, that he must have adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, a proper opportunity to give and call evidence and question those witnesses called against him. What fairness requires will vary from case to case and manifestly the gravity and complexity of the charges and of the defence will impact on what fairness requires. In this context we have born in mind, as did the judge, the points made by the Human Rights Court in Paragraphs 30 and 39 of Albert and Le Compte v Belgium, and in paragraphs 32 and 33 of Dombo Beheer BV v The Netherlands [1993] 18 EHRR 213.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Clarke, And, Mr. Justice Wall

Citations:

Times 15-Dec-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 1085, [2001] EWCA Civ 2015, [2002] IRLR 297

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Official Receiver v Stern and Another CA 20-Nov-2001
The director appealed against a 12 year disqualification. The basis of the disqualification was unlawful trading to the detriment of creditors, and taking excess drawings. . .
Appeal from – Regina v Securities and Futures Authority Limited Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of Securities and Futures Authority Limited ex parte Bertrand Fleurose Admn 26-Apr-2001
Those elements of Human Rights law which related to criminal charges could not be applied to disciplinary proceedings of the Securities and Futures Authority. Such proceedings are in their nature civil proceedings. Although a financial penalty was . .

Cited by:

Cited – G, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others CA 20-Jan-2010
The claimant was a teaching assistant. A complaint had been made that he had kissed a boy having work experience at the school, but it had been decided that no criminal prosecution would follow. He sought judicial review of the school’s decision to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167307

Rajkumar v Lalla, Wooding, Mohammed, Walters, Seemungal, (Public Service Commission) and Baptiste (The Commissioner of Prisons): PC 29 Nov 2001

(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant complained that he had not been treated fairly as a civil servant in having been passed over for promotion. He sought to appeal a finding on judicial review.
Held: While some proceedings for judicial review require more elaborate procedures, it is in no sense an optional procedure to be contrasted with some more formal procedure, and no leave is required from a final order in such proceedings. The appellant had been an acting Prison Officer grade II for ten years. The decision of the judge was in error, but the committee could not order his appointment. The case was remitted for the Civil Service Commission for their active consideration, and in the absence of a positive decision, full reasons were to be given.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Sir Andrew Leggatt

Citations:

Appeal No 1 of 2001, [2001] UKPC 53

Links:

PC, PC, PC, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

Cited – Jones v Solomon 1986
(Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago) Judicial review proceedings do not involve the full trial process, and are therefore summary. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Employment, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166941

Coker and Osamor v The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chancellor’s Department: CA 22 Nov 2001

The Lord Chancellor’s action in appointing to a special adviser’s post someone he already knew and trusted, without first advertising the post openly, was not an act of sex or race discrimination. Had they applied, they would not have been appointed because they were not personally known to the Lord Chancellor. In practice a post had been created for the person appointed. It was claimed that the requirement that the applicant be known to the Lord Chancellor, and be acceptable to him, had a disproportionate requirement against women and against non-white applicants. If the tribunal had reasoned that such a requirement would exclude greater proportions of such potential applicants, then the reasoning was wrong. Indirect discrimination requirement looked at the effect on the pool of potential candidates. It was discriminatory only if a significant proportion of the pool were able to satisfy the requirement. Where the requirement excluded almost the entirety of the pool, it could not constitute discrimination within the statutes. Since the requirement excluded everyone except the person appointed, it could have had no disproportionate effect on the different groupings within the pool.

Judges:

Lord Phillips Mr, Lord Justice Schiemann, And, Lord Justice Mummery

Citations:

Times 03-Dec-2001, Gazette 17-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1756, [2002] Emp LR 91, [2002] IRLR 80, [2002] ICR 321

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sex Discrimination Act 1975 1(1)(b), Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC) (OJ 1976 L39/40), Race Relations Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Coker and Osamor v Lord Chancellor and Lord Chancellor’s Department ET 28-Jul-1999
It was capable of being indirect sex-discrimination to appoint a person to a post from a circle of friends. This would necessarily restrict appointees to a group which favoured men more than women. The requirement that the Lord Chancellor should . .

Cited by:

Cited – Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 27-Feb-2003
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166924

Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work: QBD 9 May 2000

The Central Office of Tribunals must record the particulars of Employment Tribunal decisions. It has in the past recorded the existence of the application but no details. The court held that the register must include details of the parties, the particulars of the allegations made, and the full text of the decision where recorded. The word ‘particulars’ has a clear meaning to lawyers which would include such details, and other provisions presumed that such details were provided.

Citations:

Times 09-May-2000

Statutes:

Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1996 1757

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88664

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions, ex parte Rochford District Council: QBD 31 May 2000

A council had failed to fulfil its obligation to update and republish its local plan. The applicant had sought permission to develop a block of flats, but the council failed to determine the application. He appealed to the inspector who also awarded him a contribution to his costs on the basis that there was no proper reason for state of the council’s plan, and because of an error in the application of a policy. On appeal it as held that though the faults pre-dated the application, that was clearly provided for in Circular 8/93

Citations:

Times 31-May-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88625

Regina v Department of Health, Ex Parte Bhaugeerutty and Another: QBD 1 May 1998

Decision of two lay members of Registered Homes Tribunal against view of deceased qualified member who had indicated contrary view but had not considered other opinions could not stand.

Citations:

Times 01-May-1998

Statutes:

Registered Homes Act 1984 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88436

Regina v Environmental Agency, ex parte Marchiori and Another: QBD 12 Apr 2001

The Agency had granted licences for the disposal of nuclear waste from military sites by a private company. Such disposals were not governed by the Euratom Treaty, which dealt with civil wastes only. The matter was generated in the course of the Trident nuclear weapons programme, the legality of which under international law, which the Environment Agency had properly considered to be outwith its jurisdiction. The later confirmation by the Food Standards Agency of the licence remedied the defect as regards the need for its approval at the time.

Citations:

Gazette 12-Apr-2001

Statutes:

Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (Nov 1990), Environment Act 1995 16(4A)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Environment, Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88445

Regina v Governor of Dartmoor Prison, Ex Parte N: QBD 20 Mar 2001

The applicant was convicted of a sexual assault, sentenced and released. His conviction became spent under the Act. He later was convicted of other offences and sentenced again, but on release the details of the spent conviction were relayed by the Governor to the local social services under guidance issued by the Home Office. Though there was an apparent conflict between the guidance and the Act, the guidance required only disclosure in the course of an official duty and was lawful.

Citations:

Times 20-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88479

Regina (Wilkinson) v Broadmoor Special Hospital and Others: CA 22 Oct 2001

A detained mental patient sought to challenge a decision by his RMO that he should receive anti-psychotic medication, despite his refusal to consent, and to challenge a certificate issued by the SOAD.
Held: Where a mental patient sought to challenge by judicial review the imposition of treatment without his consent, it was open to the court to investigate the merits of the decision to impose treatment, and it was not restricted to testing the reasonableness of the decision. This would include the power of the court to require the attendance and examination of medical witnesses. Had the patient proceeded by way of a claim for damages for assault that power would have existed. If the patient’s human rights were to be respected, an investigation of the merits must be allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Brooke and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Gazette 15-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1545, [2002] 1 WLR 419, Times 02-Nov-2001, (2002) Lloyd’s Rep Med 41, (2002) UKHRR 390, (2002) 65 BMLR 15

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 58(3)(b), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Regina (G) v Ealing London Borough Council and Others QBD 28-Feb-2002
Nothing in the new rules prevented the court from allowing cross examination of witnesses in judicial review cases, though the procedure does not lend itself to cases with a high degree of factual debate. The court has a wide discretion, and the . .
Cited – Wooder, Regina (on the Application of) v Feggetter and Dr Grah CA 25-Apr-2002
The patient challenged the treatment given to him against his will as a detained mental patient. He said the opinion of the second doctor as required under the Act, had not been put into writing.
Held: Following Wilkinson, which allowed a . .
Cited – Regina (N) v Dr M and Others CA 6-Dec-2002
The patient refused consent to treatment in the form of injection of drugs, which her psychiatrists considered to be necessary.
Held: Treatment of this nature infringed the patients rights, and was not to be ordered without clear reason. The . .
Cited – PS, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medical Officer, Dr G and others Admn 10-Oct-2003
The claimant had been compulsorily detained under the Act. He complained that the detention and compulsory medication infringed his rights, and amongst other things breached his religious beliefs.
Held: This was an exceptional case requiring . .
Cited – B, Regina (on the Application of) v Ashworth Hospital Authority HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked whether a patient detained for treatment under the 1983 Act can be treated against his will for any mental disorder from which he is suffering or only for the particular form of mental disorder from which he is classified as . .
Cited – MH v Secretary of State for the Department of Health and others HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant, detained for assessment under section 2, was too disabled to make an application to the court on her own behalf. After a dispute between her mother and the medical officer over her treatment, an application was made to the county . .
Cited – B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others CA 26-Jan-2006
The applicant had been detained after a diagnosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder and convictions for rape. He had applied for discharge, but before the hearing the doctor had said he no longer opposed his release. After the hearing but before being . .
Cited – T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications CA 12-Dec-2008
The claimant telecoms companies objected to a proposed scheme for future licensing of available spectrum. The scheme anticipated a bias in favour of auctioniung such content. It was not agreed whether any challenge to the decision should be by way . .
Cited – Al-Sweady and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Defence Admn 2-Oct-2009
The claimant’s son had died whilst in the custody of the British Armed Forces in Iraq. His uncle now claimed that his human rights had been infringed. The case ‘raised a fundamental issue of jurisdiction under Article 1 of the ECHR because if the . .
Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Cited – Q, Regina (on The Application of) v Q Constabulary and Another Admn 17-Mar-2011
The claimant renewed his request for an order against the defendant that he should be given a place on a witness protection scheme. He had given evidence for the prosecution in a gangland murder trial. A risk assessment had identified a risk ‘real . .
Cited – S v Airedale National Health Service Trust QBD 22-Aug-2002
The patient had been detained, and then secluded within the mental hospital for 11 days. He claimed to have been subjected to inhuman treatment, and false imprisonment.
Held: His claim failed. The policy allowed the authority to confine him to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166719

Pfeifer And Plankl v Austria: ECHR 25 Feb 1992

Two of the judges who had acted in Mr Pfeifer’s case also presided at his trial, despite a clear provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure disqualifying them. The Commission dealt with whether the court was ‘established by law’ separately from whether it was ‘impartial’ and held that it was not. The Court held that the two complaints coincided: the court was not established by law because of the disqualification which national law had imposed so as to remove all reasonable doubt as to the impartiality of trial courts. Hence there was a breach of Article 6(1) (and there had not been an effective waiver of the applicant’s rights). In order to be effective, a waiver must be made without undue compulsion, and the consent must be an informed one. Regard must be had to the character or nature of the right when a decision is made as to whether the person was given sufficient information about that right for him to make an informed decision as to whether or not he should waive it.

Citations:

(1992) 14 EHRR 692, 10802/84, [1992] ECHR 2

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Fawdry and Co (A Firm) v Murfitt CA 14-May-2002
The judge at first instance who was ticketed to sit as a judge in the Technology and Construction Court, had been asked to sit as a judge of the High Court to take this case. The appellant said she was acting outside her powers.
Held: The . .
Cited – Di Placito v Slater and others CA 19-Dec-2003
The parties had earlier compromised their dispute, with the claimant undertaking not to lodge any further claim unless he did so within a certain time. They now sought to commence action.
Held: When considering whether to discharge such an . .
Cited – Stretford v The Football Association Ltd and Another CA 21-Mar-2007
The claimant was a football player’s agent. The licensing scheme required disputes, including disciplinary procedures, to be referred to arbitration. He denied that the rule had been incorporated in the contract. He also complained that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Administrative, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165154

Starrs and Chalmers and Bill of Advocattion for Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow v Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow and Hugh Latta Starrs and James Wilson Chalmers; Starrs v Ruxton, Ruxton v Starrs: ScHC 11 Nov 1999

The system in Scotland whereby lesser judges were appointed by the executive, for a year at a time, and could be discharged without explanation or challenge, meant that they could be seen not to be independent, and the system was a breach of the right to a fair trial by an independent judiciary. There was no open protocol for making such decisions. Unconscious fears of influence in a judge’s mind could be enough.
Lord Prosser referred to the temporary nature of the appointment of Sherriffs: ‘But I am inclined to see independence – the need for a judge not to be dependent on others – as an additional substantive requirement, rather than simply a means of achieving impartiality or a perception of impartiality. Independence will guarantee not only that the judge is disinterested in relation to the parties and the cause, but also that in fulfilling his judicial function, generally as well as individual cases, he is and can be seen to be free of links with others (whether in the executive, or indeed the judiciary, or in outside life) which might, or might be thought to, affect his assessment of the matters entrusted to him.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Prosser

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-1999, 2000 JC 208, [1999] ScotHC 242, [2000] HRLR 191

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6

Cited by:

Cited – Millar v Dickson PC 24-Jul-2001
The Board was asked whether the appellants had waived their right to an independent and impartial tribunal under article 6 of the Convention by appearing before the temporary sheriffs without objecting to their hearing their cases on the ground that . .
Cited – Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department for Judicial Review OHCS 24-Dec-2003
The applicant complained that the adjudicator who had heard his asylum appeal in 1997 had not been sufficiently independent.
Held: The tribunal lacked what had come to be called ‘structural independence’ The common law test for impartiality . .
Cited – Holder v The Law Society Admn 26-Jul-2005
The applicant challenged the independence of the respondent’s disciplinary tribunal.
Held: The claim failed: ‘the nature of the Tribunal is entirely adequately independent and impartial for the purposes for which it is constituted. The . .
Cited – Barclay and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and others CA 2-Dec-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of his challenge to the new constitutional law for Sark, and sought a declaration of incompatibility under the 1998 Act. He said that by restricting the people who could stand for election, a free democracy had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Administrative, Natural Justice, Scotland

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.164537

Metalmeccanica Fracasso SpA, Leitschutz Handels- und Montage GmbH v Amt der Salzburger Landesregierung fur den Bundesminister fur wirtschaftliche Angelegenheiten: ECJ 16 Sep 1999

Where a tendering process completed leaving only one tender remaining, the contracting authority was not required to award the contract to the only tenderer judged to be suitable: ‘In a context different from that of the present case (there were several tenderers, not just one) the Court of First Instance stated that ‘the contracting authority is not bound to follow through to its end a procedure awarding a contract’ observing that in that respect the contracting authority enjoys a broad discretion provided that its decision is in no way arbitrary.’

Citations:

C-27/98, [1999] EUECJ C-27/98, [1999] ECR I-5697, [2002] CMLR 1150

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Cited – Embassy Limousines and Services v Parliament Europeen ECFI 17-Dec-1998
ECJ 1 Procedure – Reference to the Court of Justice on the basis of an arbitration clause – Condition – Existence of a valid contract – Contract governed by Directive 92/50 requiring a written agreement – . .

Cited by:

Cited – Community Care North East (A Partnership) v Durham County Council QBD 29-Apr-2010
The parties had settled their dispute and sealed it in a Tomlin Order. The court now asked as to its power to vary such an order. The order required the defendant to reopen a tendering process, but other tenderers now objected, and the council felt . .
Cited – Montpellier Estates Ltd v Leeds City Council QBD 24-Jun-2010
The defendant sought to strike out certain parts of the claim against it relating to the tendering process for works on a substantial development. It was said that the defendant had given improper preference for the development of its own site.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Contract

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162320

Heinz-Jorg Moritz v Commission of the European Communities: ECJ 17 Dec 1992

ECJ (Judgment) 1. The periodic report constitutes an indispensable criterion of assessment each time the official’ s career is taken into consideration by the administration and a promotion procedure is tainted with irregularity in so far as the appointing authority has not been able to consider the comparative merits of the candidates because there has been a substantial delay on the part of the administration in drawing up the periodic reports of one or more of them. It does not follow that all the candidates must be at exactly the same stage regarding the state of their periodic reports when the appointment decision is taken or that the appointing authority must postpone its decision if the most recent report on one or other of the candidates is not yet final because it has been referred to the appeal assessor or to the Joint Committee. In exceptional circumstances the absence of a periodic report may be compensated for by the existence of other information on an official’ s merits. 2. If, in dismissing a plea by an official contesting the legality of a promotion procedure on the ground that the appointing authority assessed his merits in the absence of his periodic report and on the basis of a hearing of his Director-General at which he was not heard, the Court of First Instance merely holds that that hearing did not make that procedure unlawful but does not mention the reasons justifying recourse to information other than the periodic report or the reasons why hearing the Director-General was sufficient to compensate for the absence of that periodic report, it has failed to state sufficient reasons for its judgment. 3. It is for the Court of First Instance to respond to the pleas and claims as they were raised before it by the parties. It does not fulfil that obligation where it rejects a claim for compensation on the ground that a claim based on the same allegedly wrongful conduct of the administration was dismissed by a judgment given in another case between the same parties when the two claims are not identical, in so far as they are based on separate causes of damage, namely the fault consisting in the appointment of a candidate following an irregular promotion procedure, on the ground that the appointing authority assessed the respective merits of the candidates in the absence of the appellant’ s periodic report, and the fault consisting in the fact that the periodic report in question was drawn up late by the appointing authority.

Citations:

C-68/91, [1992] EUECJ C-68/91P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Administrative

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160663

Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities: ECJ 22 Jun 1993

ECJ 1. Where the Court finds in a number of judgments that practices exist in a Member State which are incompatible with the Community rules on the common organizations of the markets and that that Member State has consistently resisted the Commission’ s requests for on-the-spot inquiries, the Commission is entitled, in the context of the procedure for the clearance of EAGGF accounts, to consider that those practices continued after the period to which the Court’ s findings related and, in the absence of proof to the contrary from the Member State concerned, to refuse to charge to the EAGGF expenditure in the sector affected by the unlawful practices. 2. It is for the national authorities which subsequently amend figures of decisive significance for the purposes of the calculation of the amount which the Member State concerned owes to the EAGGF in connection with the co -responsibility levy in the cereals sector to provide sufficient specific information to justify that change. 3. Where the Commission, after receiving a complaint regarding the total forfeiture of a security given by an economic operator which has purchased intervention products, has informed the national authorities concerned that it is possible to recalculate the amount of the security having to be regarded as definitively forfeit and makes that recalculation conditional solely on the primary obligation undertaken by the operator being fulfilled, the national authorities cannot be criticized, on the clearance of the EAGGF accounts, for having effected that recalculation in accordance with a method consistent with the content of the communication sent to them, even though it may be incorrect or incomplete.

Citations:

C-56/91, [1993] EUECJ C-56/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Administrative, Agriculture

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160655

Commission v Denmark: ECJ 22 Jun 1993

Opinion – Tesauro AG said: ‘where a public contract falls to be awarded, it is precisely because the procedure is a competition that it must be ensured that all those who take part have an equal chance; otherwise, it would no longer be a public tendering procedure but private bargaining. In sum, equal treatment underlies any set of rules governing procedures for the award of public contracts since it is the very essence of such procedures.’

Judges:

Advocate-General Tesauro

Citations:

C-243/89, [1993] ECR I-3553, [1993] EUECJ C-243/89

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Limited v The Corporate Officer of The House of Commons TCC 28-Oct-1999
The claimant said that the respondent had awarded a contract for works at the House of Commons disregarding its obligations under European law as regards open tendering. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Administrative

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160318

Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Another: CA 26 Jul 2001

The appeal court had previously remitted a matter to the Restrictive Practices court, having found that the court might be biased. The parties having settled the main litigation, they sought the additional costs incurred by them in correcting what they said was the fault of the court. The Lord Chancellor responded that the parties were acting only in a representative capacity, the court hearing was not determinative of their rights, thus their Human rights had not been infringed. No representative order had been made. The request failed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Robert Walker, Master of the Rolls

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1217

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 51, Human Rights Act 1998, Restrictive Practices Court (Resale Prices) Rules 1976 9(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Costs, Human Rights

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159908

Dr Gnanapragasam Anton Joseph Selvanathan v The General Medical Council: PC 11 Oct 2000

Decisions of the Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC should now be accompanied by explanations. Earlier practice of issuing a bare decision had been superseded by general practice in decision making bodies, and also by detailed rules governing the practice of the committee. Fairness required reasons to be given so that the disciplined doctor could make an informed decision on whether to appeal.

Citations:

Times 26-Oct-2000, (Appeal No 21 of 2000, [2000] UKPC 37

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Statutes:

General Medical Council Preliminary Proceedings and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1988 Order in Council 1988/2255, Medical Act 1983

Administrative, Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159426

Roussel UCLAF Australia Pty Limited and others v Pharmaceutical Management Agency Limited: PC 30 Jul 1998

(New Zealand) Allegation that a committee had acted unreasonably in setting a price for pharmaceuticals.

Judges:

Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Sir John Balcombe

Citations:

[1998] UKPC 36

Links:

Bailii

Commonwealth, Administrative

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159317

Stewart v Secretary of State for Scotland (Scotland): HL 22 Jan 1998

The dismissal of a Scottish Sheriff ‘for inability’ is not limited in meaning to either mental or physical infirmity, but can also include simple incompetence. The fact that the inquiry into the sherriff’s unfitness was conducted in private was not unfair.

Judges:

Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Steyn, Lord Hutton, Lord Saville of Newdigate

Citations:

Times 28-Jan-1998, [1998] UKHL 3, 1998 SC (HL) 81

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Sherriffs Courts (Scotland) Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Stewart v Secretary of State for Scotland IHCS 1996
The House considered the test of unfitness of a Sherriff: ‘. . what has to be shown is that he is not really capable of performing the proper function of a judge at all.’ . .

Cited by:

Cited – Meerabux v The Attorney General of Belize PC 23-Mar-2005
(Belize) The applicant complained at his removal as a justice of the Supreme Court, stating it was unconstitutional. The complaint had been decided by a member of the Bar Council which had also recommended his removal, and he said it had been . .
Appealed to – Stewart v Secretary of State for Scotland IHCS 1996
The House considered the test of unfitness of a Sherriff: ‘. . what has to be shown is that he is not really capable of performing the proper function of a judge at all.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Scotland, Legal Professions

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.158934

Regina v Kansal, on a Reference From the Criminal Cases Review Commission (2): CACD 24 May 2001

Once a case had been referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the court had to make a declaration, even if the case was very old. The effect of the 1998 Act on statute law was not retrospective, but where it affected common law the effect could be retrospective, since common law was deemed always to have been the way it now is. The result was that standards of evidence in criminal cases had retrospectively made many convictions liable to be set aside.
‘(i) The CCRC, subject to the proper exercise of the discretion conferred by section 9 of the Criminal Appeal Act, can refer to this court a conviction following a trial whenever it took place;
(ii) this court, once such a reference has been made, has no option, however old the case, but to declare the conviction unsafe if that is the result either of the admission of evidence obtained in breach of article 6 or of a change in the common law, which is deemed always to have been that which it is authoritatively declared to be, as, for example, by reason of R v Preddy’,

Judges:

Rose LJ VP, Rougier J, McCombie J

Citations:

Times 11-Jun-2001, Gazette 12-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1260, [2001] 3 WLR 751

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Kansal CACD 24-Jun-1992
K had been convicted of two counts of obtaining property by deception contrary to section 15 of the Theft Act 1968. He was also convicted of two counts under the Insolvency Act 1986, namely that being a bankrupt (a) he removed property which he was . .
Cited – Regina v Preddy; Regina v Slade; Regina v Dhillon (Conjoined Appeals) HL 10-Jul-1996
The appellants were said to have made false mortgage applications. They appealed convictions for dishonestly obtaining property by deception.
Held: A chose in action created by an electronic bank transfer was not property which was capable of . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Administrative, Human Rights

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.158770

Regina v The Chief Constable of the Northumbria Constabulary ex parte Thompson: CA 8 Mar 2001

A police officer had been dismissed but was pursuing an action against the authority. At the same time he obtained work as a probationary solicitor’s clerk doing police station work. The Chief Constable issued an order that he should not, under PACE be admitted to any police station.
Held: The order was unlawful, since it prevented the necessary exercise of a lawful discretion by individual officers. The circumstances might suggest that general advice be given about his character, and it would be surprising if any police officer would admit him.

Citations:

Times 20-Mar-2001, Gazette 20-Apr-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 321

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Administrative, Legal Professions

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147460

Bache v Essex County Council: CA 21 Jan 2000

An Employment Tribunal did not have the right to refuse to hear a representative selected by a party appearing before it. Where that representative was a member of a professional body, then the tribunal might exercise some discipline by referring misconduct to a regulatory body, but the right for the party to choose his representative was simply stated and absolute. The tribunal could not require him to represent himself.

Citations:

Times 02-Feb-2000, Gazette 03-Feb-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 3

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Administrative

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147036

in re HK (an Infant): QBD 1967

A Commonwealth citizen had a right to be admitted to this country if he was (as this party claimed to be) under the age of 16. The immigration officers were not satisfied that he was under 16 and refused him admission.
Held: The Lord Chief Justice said that even if they were acting in an administrative capacity, they were under a duty to act fairly – meaning that they should give the immigrant an opportunity of satisfying them that he was under 16. Part of the duty to provide a fair hearing includes disclosure to a party of prejudicial information, in order that the party may respond.

Judges:

Lord Parker LCJ

Citations:

[1967] 2 QB 617, (1967) 111 Sol Jo 296, [1967] 2 WLR 962, [1967] 1 All ER 226

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Schmidt and Another v Secretary of State for Home Affairs CA 19-Dec-1968
The plaintiffs had come to England to study at a college run by the Church of Scientology, and now complained that their student visas had not been extended so as to allow them to complete their studies. They said that the decision had been made for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Administrative

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.516250

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment, Ex Parte Amraf Training Plc: QBD 17 Oct 2000

Although the department had registered a course for an eighty per cent subsidy for trainees, in the absence of knowledge of what fees would be charged, it remained open to the department later to withdraw that recognition when the amounts payable appeared not to represent value for money, and even though students had been accepted onto the course. The existing students had been allowed to complete the course, and the provider offered the opportunity to apply to re-register at a lower course fee, but had refused. Value for money was a relevant factor.

Citations:

Times 17-Oct-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Education, Administrative

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.87704

Edge and others v Pensions Ombudsman and Another: CA 29 Jul 1999

The Pensions Ombudsman was wrong to set aside the decision of pensions trustees where that decision was properly made within the scope of a discretion given to the Trustees. He should not carry out an investigation where no particular benefit could accrue, and also not where his decision might adversely affect parties who could not be party to the process.
In reaching his decision whether and how to exercise his discretionary powers the Pensions Ombudsman must take into account all relevant but no irrelevant factors. The court noted the similarity between the grounds on which a decision by trustees may be attacked and the grounds on which official decision-making is subject to judicial review. Chadwick LJ talked about the ‘ordinary duty which the law imposes on a person who is entrusted with the exercise of a discretionary power’ when comparing the duties of trustees with the duties of public bodies under the Wednesbury principle. He also drew my attention to other contexts where the exercise of a power has been set aside for a failure to take into account a relevant consideration.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

Times 19-Oct-1999, [2000] Ch 602, [1999] EWCA Civ 2013, [1999] 4 All ER 546

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Edge v Pensions Ombudsman 12-Dec-1997
The Vice Chancellor discussed whether the pensions ombudsman had powers wider than those of the court. Referring to Hillsdown, he said: ‘I respectfully agree with this approach. In a case in which the maladministration complained of consists of an . .
Appeal from – Edge v Pensions Ombudsman 12-Dec-1997
The Vice Chancellor discussed whether the pensions ombudsman had powers wider than those of the court. Referring to Hillsdown, he said: ‘I respectfully agree with this approach. In a case in which the maladministration complained of consists of an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Abacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Colyb Limited v Barr, Barr, and Barr ChD 6-Feb-2003
The court considered the Rule in Hastings-Bass, and specifically (1) whether the trustee’s decision is open to challenge when the failure to take a consideration into account is not attributable to a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the . .
Cited – Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v CCA Stationery Ltd ChD 12-Dec-2003
The claimant had managed a pension scheme for the respondent company. It now challenged a finding of maladministration of the scheme, with respect to the methods of calculation of discounts applicable to those leaving the scheme.
Held: Since . .
Cited – Fourie v Le Roux and others HL 24-Jan-2007
The appellant, liquidator of two South African companies, had made a successful without notice application for an asset freezing order. He believed that the defendants had stripped the companies of substantial assets. The order was set aside for . .
Cited – Pitt and Another v Holt and Others ChD 18-Jan-2010
The deceased had created a settlement in favour of his wife. He suffered serious injury and placed the damages in trust, but in a form which created an unnecessary liability to Inheritance Tax on his death. The wife’s mental health act receiver now . .
Cited – Pitt and Another v Holt and Another ChD 18-Jan-2010
The claimant sought to unravel a settlement she had made as receiver for her late husband, saying that it had been made without consideration of its Inheritance Tax implications. The Revenue said that there was no operative mistake so as to allow . .
Cited – Futter and Another v Revenue and Customs; Pitt v Same SC 9-May-2013
Application of Hastings-Bass Rule
F had created two settlements. Distributions were made, but overlooking the effect of section 2(4) of the 2002 Act, creating a large tax liability. P had taken advice on the investment of the proceeds of a damages claim and created a discretionary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Financial Services, Administrative

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146928

Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested: CA 1 Jul 1999

The respondent had made an order banning the processing of milk products from the interested party’s farm into cheese products. Cheese manufacturers objected to the order. The order had been held unlawful, and the Secretary of State now appealed.
Held: Proportionality itself is not always equated with intense scrutiny

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Otton, Robert Walker LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1739, (2000) 2 LGLR 41, [1999] COD 321, [1999] 3 CMLR 123, (2000) 55 BMLR 38, [1999] EuLR 968, [2000] EHLR 52

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Food Safety Act 1990 13

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Eastside Cheese Company QBD 1-Dec-1998
An order made by the Secretary of State for a cheese manufacturer to cease production and to seize product without compensation as an emergency was disproportionate where the local officers had adequate power under section 9 under which compensation . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
Application for leave to appeal to House of Lords – refused. However ‘on public health issues which require the evaluation of complex scientific evidence, the national court may and should be slow to interfere with a decision which a responsible . .

Cited by:

See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
Application for leave to appeal to House of Lords – refused. However ‘on public health issues which require the evaluation of complex scientific evidence, the national court may and should be slow to interfere with a decision which a responsible . .
Cited – British American Tobacco UK Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Admn 5-Nov-2004
The claimants challenged the validity of regulations restricting cigarette advertisements, saying that greater exceptions should have been allowed, and that the regulations infringed their commercial right of free speech.
Held: The Regulations . .
Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Consumer, Administrative

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.146654

B and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 12 Oct 2018

B and ND, the Claimants in this matter, are British Citizens and they were both the holders of British passports. The Security Minister, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘the SSHD’), exercised the Royal Prerogative to cancel each of their passports. By these proceedings, the Claimants challenge the legality of those decisions.

Judges:

Nicol J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2651 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Immigration

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.625903

Worton, Re Judicial Review: QBNI 9 Feb 2010

‘By this judicial review the applicant seeks an order quashing the decision of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland . . confirming his earlier decision not to award the applicant any sum in compensation under the ex gratia scheme.’

Citations:

[2010] NIQB 14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Administrative

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.403413

Regina (H) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority: QBD 11 Nov 2002

The applicant claimed for damages having been injured. All the information requested by the Authority had been received, but the Authority unreasonably delayed settling the claim. The claimant sought damages under the Human Rights Act.
Held: The correct approach would have been to seek an order requiring the Authority to make a decision within a certain time. The Authority had requested certain information which was irrelevant to its determination. The court ordered the Authority to make a determination within 28 days, and the Article 8 application was not to be pursued.

Judges:

McCombe J

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-2002, Gazette 16-Jan-2003

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.178299

Regina v Securities and Futures Authority Limited Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of Securities and Futures Authority Limited ex parte Bertrand Fleurose: Admn 26 Apr 2001

Those elements of Human Rights law which related to criminal charges could not be applied to disciplinary proceedings of the Securities and Futures Authority. Such proceedings are in their nature civil proceedings. Although a financial penalty was capable of being imposed, it could only be enforced as a civil debt. The applicant had the normal private rights of any member of an association.

Citations:

Times 15-May-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 292

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Fleurose v The Securities and Futures Authority Ltd, The Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of the Securities & Futures Authority Ltd CA 21-Dec-2001
The applicant sought to challenge a decision suspending him from authorisation to act as a financial adviser. He was alleged to have sought to affect the Index of share values in order that his company should not be liable under certain options. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Financial Services, Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140321

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mario Montana: Admn 23 Nov 2000

The distinction made in British nationality law, between the relationships of mother and child, and that of father and child, when the parents were not married, was not a breach of the human right to a family life. The claimant suggested that the rule was discriminatory both as sex discrimination, and as discrimination against the child as illegitimate. In this case the refusal of British citizenship had not in fact interfered with the child’s family relationships, and there was no previous case in which such a distinction had been found. The cases for citizenship under the two sections were quite different, and were not proper comparators.

Citations:

Times 05-Dec-2000, Gazette 11-Jan-2001, [2000] EWHC Admin 421

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

British Nationality Act 1981 2 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Human Rights, Discrimination, Children

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140237

Regina v Video Appeals Committee of British Board of Film Classification (ex parte British Board of Film Classification): Admn 16 May 2000

Where a video might expose certain possible viewers of it to harm because of its content, that factor could be allowed for in the decision whether to grant or withhold a certificate, but could not lead to an automatic refusal of such a certificate. The inability to quantify the number of minors who might see and be influenced by a video was not conclusive that it should not be certified until such evidence was available.

Citations:

Times 07-Jun-2000, [2000] EWHC Admin 341

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Video Recordings Act 1984

Media, Administrative

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140156

Regina v Right Honourable Lord Saville of Newdigate Sir Edward Somers Justice William Hoyt (Sitting As Saville Inquiry) (ex parte A; B; D; H; J; K; M; O; Q; R; S; U; V; Z and Ac and Ad): Admn 17 Jun 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 556

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – A and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and others CA 28-Jul-1999
Former soldiers who had been involved in the events in Londonderry in 1972, and were to be called to give evidence before a tribunal of inquiry, still had cause to fear from their names being given, and so were entitled to anonymity when giving such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139820

Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Pfizer Ltd: Admn 26 May 1999

The order of the Secretary of State advising the prescription of Viagra (Sildenafil), in certain limited circumstances only, was in breach of the European Transparency Directive. This remained the case despite a later addition confirming that the document remained for guidance only.

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 504

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 89/105 (the Transparency Directive)

Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139768

Regina v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration ex parte Balchin and others: Admn 24 May 1999

Judges:

Dyson J

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 484

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration ex parte Balchin Admn 25-Oct-1996
The petitioners complained that the Secretary of State for Transport was guilty of maladministration in confirming Road Orders without seeking an assurance from Norfolk County Council that the Balchins would be given adequate compensation for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139748

Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Andrew Tew; George Daniel Milne; and Steven Garner: Admn 7 May 1999

An outline application for a shopping development, gave no details of the expected floor area, and nor was there an environmental assessment.
Held: The failure to give the floor area was not critical, but even at this stage the ommission of the environmental impact plan was. A policy must be read in the context of the legislative framework and must be read fairly and as a whole.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

Gazette 19-May-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 409, [2001] JPL 407, [2000] JPL 54, [2001] Env LR 22, [1999] 3 PLR 74

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Newbury District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 1980
Issues arose as to a new planning permission for two existing hangars.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The question of the validity of conditions attached to planning permissions will sometimes be a difficult one. To be valid, a condition must be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v Hammersmith and Fulham Admn 15-May-2003
Outline permission was granted for a large development, reserving certain matters. The applicant challenged the permission saying that the application had not included the information required under the Regulations, and the authority had failed to . .
Cited – Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 26-Nov-2003
The claimant sought to quash a planning decision on the basis that a screening decision had not been made.
Held: Though the procedures within the authority could have been bettered, there was no formal requirement for a screening option to . .
Cited – The British Beer and Pub Association and others v Canterbury City Council Admn 24-Jun-2005
The council had required of applicants for liquor licenses more detailed information than was required by the statute. The Association challenged their policy.
Held: One aim of the legislation is to allow licensing authorities to provide a . .
Se Also – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex Parte Milne (2) QBD 31-Jul-2000
Developers submitted applications for outline permission for the development of a business park. The applicant sought to quash the grant on the basis that the environmental assessment was insufficiently detailed, and contained reserved matters, and . .
Cited – Gosbee and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 20-Mar-2003
A bungalow was not demolished as required by a condition when planning permission for a new dwelling was given. An enforcement notice was issued requiring the demolition of the bungalow.
Held: ‘in determining whether the interference is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139673

English Bridge Union Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The English Sports Council and Others: Admn 15 Oct 2015

The claimant Union claimed that the defendant should recognise the game of bridge as a sport. The defendant had adopted a definition from Europe which required physical activity, and the Union said that this was a misconstruction of its Royal Charter. The result would substantiallyy affect support for the game.
Held: The request for review was refused.
Dove J said: ‘I am entirely satisfied that it is permissible to have regard to parts of an Act which have been repealed in seeking to understand the will and purpose of Parliament in enacting a part of the Act which remains in force. At the time when an Act is passed it is meant to be read and understood as a whole. Thus reading the Act as a whole, and as passed, will properly assist in an understanding of the will of Parliament in enacting each individual part of it. Defining the intention of Parliament in respect of each individual ingredient of the legislation can and should be legitimately undertaken having regard to the meaning of each ingredient within the context of how the statute was enacted in its entirety. Whilst upon repeal of a part of the statute that part will cease to have substantive legal effect, there is in my view no reason in principle why it should not continue to be regarded as part of the context of the enactment of the statute as a whole and therefore a legitimate aid to construction.’
As to the 1937 Act: ‘bearing on the scope of the phrase ‘physical training and recreation’ it is perfectly clear that that phrase is focused upon physical activity and was intended to encompass physical recreation, rather than any other kind of recreation.’ and ‘physical training and recreation’ within s3(1)(a) is to be interpreted as meaning physical training and physical recreation. ‘ and ‘I am satisfied that the proper interpretation of the 1937 Act and the surrounding factual context of the 1996 Royal Charter are of far greater significance than any help which is to be derived from dictionary definitions of the individual words comprising the phrase in question. Read in context therefore, the word ‘sport’ as it appears in the 1996 Royal Charter phrase ‘sport and physical recreation’ connotes and requires an essential element of physical activity. In this connection the decision of the defendant to adopt the European Sport Charter definition of sport which requires an element of physical activity was entirely consistent with the proper understanding of their Royal Charter. Thus, whilst the word ‘sport’ may have other definitions in other contexts, the correct interpretation of the operative phrase in the 1996 Royal Charter incorporates in this instance an essential element of physical activity.’

Judges:

Dove J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2875 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Physical Training and Recreation Act 1937, Charities Act 2011 3(2)(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Surtees And Another, Assignees Of The Estate And Effects Of A Bankrupt, v Ellison 6-Jul-1829
Evidence of a trading which ceased before the 6 G. 4, c. 16, took effect, will not support a commission of bankrupt issued after that time. . .
Cited – In The Matter Of The Mexican And South American Company Grisewood And Smith’s Case De Pass’s Case 15-Jul-1859
A trading company was established in 1838, upon the terms contained in the prospectus, which placed its affairs under the management of individual directors, but contained no provision as to the transfers of shares. The certificates of shares . .
Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .
Cited – The Project Management Institute, Regina (on The Application of) v The Minister for The Cabinet Office and Others Admn 17-Jul-2014
Mitting J set out the background to Royal Charters: ‘This is, I believe, the first time that the grant or refusal of a Royal Charter has been the subject of litigation. I propose, therefore, to begin by a brief analysis of the history and nature of . .
Cited – Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow SC 26-Jan-2011
The appellant sought housing after leaving her home to escape domestic violence. The violence was short of physical violence, and the authority had denied a duty to rehouse her. She said that the term ‘domestic violence’ in the Act was not intended . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Constitutional

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.553493

The Project Management Institute, Regina (on The Application of) v The Minister for The Cabinet Office and Others: Admn 17 Jul 2014

Mitting J set out the background to Royal Charters: ‘This is, I believe, the first time that the grant or refusal of a Royal Charter has been the subject of litigation. I propose, therefore, to begin by a brief analysis of the history and nature of Royal Charters and the process by which they are granted. A Royal Charter is granted in the exercise of prerogative powers -‘the residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority, which at any given time is legally left in the hands of the crown’: Dicey, The Law of the Constitution page 424. It has the essential qualities of an executive, rather than legislative act, and is ‘best not described as legislation’: Craies on Legislation 10th edition paragraph 3.7.8. Its original purpose was to grant corporate personality to bodies of persons conducting activities for public or private benefit. The first Royal Charter in the first category was granted to the University of Cambridge in 1231 and the second to the Sadlers Company in 1272. Numerous grants have been made to educational institutions and livery companies ever since. The first grant of a Royal Charter to a group of persons carrying on a profession was to the Royal College of Physicians of London in 1518. At the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries, Royal Charters were granted to institutions which played a major part in the economic life of the country, notably the Bank of England in 1694 and the South Sea Company in 1711. The puncturing of the South Sea bubble in 1720 caused Parliament to prohibit the formation of joint stock companies except by Royal Charter in the Bubble Act 1720. Thereafter until the early 19th century, the grant of Royal Charters in the economic field was limited to a small number of banks and insurance companies. Between the enactment of the Chartered Companies Act 1837 and the Limited Liability Act 1955, the grant of a Royal Charter was the principle means by which economic activity could be carried on by an incorporated body without putting at risk the entire assets of those who’ve subscribed capital to it. In consequence, a large number of trading and mining companies were incorporated by Royal Charter between those dates. Few were afterwards. From then on, the great majority of bodies incorporated by Royal charter have been educational, charitable or professional. Lord Diplock was not quite right when he identified this function of the Privy Council as ‘the grant of corporate personality to deserving bodies of persons’ in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985) AC 374 at 410B, because almost all of the grantees have already been incorporated under legislative provisions. Grants are still made to un-incorporated groups of persons – for example livery companies and, in 2012, Marylebone Cricket Club – but current practice is accurately stated by the Privy Council on its website: ‘new grants of Royal Charter are these days reserved from imminent professional bodies or charities which have a solid record of achievement and are financially sound.
An organisation seeking the grant of a Royal Charter must petition Her Majesty the Queen in Counsel. On its website, the Privy Council office invites informal approaches before a petition is lodged, to afford that office the opportunity of giving advice about the chances of success. Petitioners are advised to take soundings amongst other bodies which may have an interest in the outcome. Once a formal petition has been lodged, it is advertised in the London Gazette. Any objector is entitled within six weeks to lodge a counter-petition. The petition is considered by a sub-committee of the Privy Council, comprising ministers of the departments most closely connected with the activities of the petitioner. Unanimity amongst the members of the committee is required before a recommendation for the grant of a Royal Charter will be made.
A petitioner is required to submit a draft of its charter and by-laws. Both must be approved by the Attorney General. Once a Royal Charter is granted, the Charter and by-laws cannot be amended without the consent of the Privy Council.’

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 2438 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .

Cited by:

Cited – English Bridge Union Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The English Sports Council and Others Admn 15-Oct-2015
The claimant Union claimed that the defendant should recognise the game of bridge as a sport. The defendant had adopted a definition from Europe which required physical activity, and the Union said that this was a misconstruction of its Royal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.534428

Edinburgh District Council v Secretary of State for Scotland: SCS 1985

Inner House

Judges:

Lord Jauncey

Citations:

1985 SC 261

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Cited – Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC 19-Jun-2013
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.447657

Regina v Director of GCHQ ex parte Hodges: QBD 20 Jul 1988

The Court accepted evidence that the positive vetting procedure operated at GCHQ was required in the interests of national security.
Held: The withdrawal of the applicant’s positive vetting clearance was not justiciable. As to the Civil Service Union Case: ‘I apprehend for myself that the majority of their lordships were of the view that once it had been established by evidence that a decision had been made on behalf of Government in the interests of national security the whole ambit of that decision was one which the courts can neither enquire nor intervene.’

Citations:

Unreported, 20 July 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Manelfi Admn 25-Oct-1996
The applicant sought judicial review of the defendant’s refusal to employ him to work at GCHQ, which had a policy not to employ anyone with non-British parents save exceptionally. The claimant said this was racially discriminatory.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.238152

Lloyd v McMahon: HL 12 Mar 1987

The district auditor had issued a certificate under the 1982 Act surcharging the appellant councillors in the sum of 106,103, pounds being the amount of a loss incurred or deficiency caused, as the auditor found, by their wilful misconduct.
Held: An aggrieved objector to local government spending should pursue his rights under the Act and not by way of seeking judicial review.
the requirements of fairness depend on the character of the decision-making body, the kind of decision it is to make and the legal framework within which it operates.
Lord Keith said: ‘It is, however, my opinion that the particular appeal mechanism provided for by section 20(3) of the Act of 1982, considered in its context, is apt to enable the court, notwithstanding that it finds some procedural defect in the conduct of an audit which has resulted in a certificate based on wilful misconduct, to inquire into the merits of the case and arrive at its own decision thereon. Section 20(3)(b) empowers the court to ‘confirm the decision or quash it and given any certificate which the auditor could have given.’ The relevant rules of court enable a rehearing of the broadest possible scope to take place . . In the circumstances, it would be quite unreasonable and not in accordance with the intendment of the enactment to hold that the court, where an issue is raised as to the fairness of the procedure adopted by the auditor, is confined to a judicial review species of jurisdiction so as to have power only to quash or affirm the auditor’s certificate without entering upon its own examination of the merits of the case. No doubt there may be cases where the procedural defect is so gross, and the prejudice suffered by the appellant so extreme, that it would be appropriate to quash the auditor’s decision on that ground. But in my opinion the court has a discretion, where it considers that justice can properly be done by its own investigation of the merits, to follow that course.’
Lord Bridge said: ‘My Lords, the so called rules of natural justice are not engraved on tablets of stone. To use the phrase which better expresses the underlying concept, what the requirements of fairness demand when any body, domestic, administrative or judicial, has to make a decision which will affect the rights of individuals depends on the character of the decision-making body, the kind of decision it has to make and the statutory or other framework in which it operates. In particular, it is well-established that when a statute has conferred on any body the power to make decisions affecting individuals, the courts will not only require the procedure prescribed by the statute to be followed, but will readily imply so much and no more to be introduced by way of additional procedural safeguards as will ensure attainment of fairness.’ and ‘In every case it must be for the court, as a matter of discretion, to decide how in all the circumstances its jurisdiction under section 20(3) can best be exercised to meet the justice of the case. But I am clearly of opinion that when the court has, as here, in fact conducted a full hearing on the merits and reached a conclusion that the issue of a certificate was justified, it would be an erroneous exercise of discretion nevertheless to quash the certificate on the ground that, before the matter reached the court, there had been some defect in the procedure followed.’
Lord Templeman said: ‘The task of the court was to ‘give any certificate which the auditor could have given’ (section 20(3) of the Act of 1982). The court was not concerned with any defects in the procedure adopted by the auditor because those defects (if any) did not hamper the prosecution or conduct of the appeal. Different considerations apply if a statute only allows an appeal to a court on a question of law, or entitles or obliges the court of law to rely on the facts found by the tribunal. And the defects in the inquiry conducted by the tribunal may be so prejudicial to the aggrieved person that the court in its discretion may decide to quash the decision and not to proceed with an appeal on the merits in the absence of the views of the tribunal after a proper inquiry. In the present case the Divisional Court was entitled to consider the appeal on its merits and on the basis of the evidence presented to the court.’

Judges:

Lord Bridge, Lord Keith, Lord Templeman

Citations:

[1987] AC 625, [1987] UKHL 5, [1987] 1 All ER 1118, [1987] 2 WLR 821

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Finance Act 1982 17, General Rate Act 1967 20(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Lloyd v McMahon CA 1986
Councillors had been surcharged by the district auditor. The Act provided for an appeal to the High Court by anyone ‘aggrieved’ by the decision of an auditor, and further provided that on the hearing of the appeal ‘the court may confirm, vary or . .
Cited – In Re Smith and Fawcett Ltd CA 1942
Directors to act Without Collateral Purpose
The primary duty of a director imposed by the general law is that he should act in what he considers to be the best interests of the company, and not for any collateral purpose. That duty is a subjective one that depends on the directors exercising . .
Cited – Jeffs and Others v The New Zealand Dairy Production and Marketing Board and Others PC 13-Oct-1966
(New Zealand) . .
Cited – Leary v National Union of Vehicle Builders 1971
The court faced questions on a trades union’s decision as to the membership of the applicant.
Held: As a general rule, ‘a failure of natural justice in the trial body cannot be cured by a sufficiency of natural justice in an appellate body.’ . .
Cited – Calvin v Carr PC 15-Jan-1979
(New South Wales) It was argued that a decision of the stewards of the Australian Jockey Club was void for having been made in breach of the rules of natural justice.
Held: The stewards were entitled to use the evidence of their eyes and their . .
Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (DR) (AM) v St George’s Catholic School and Others, Regina (A) v Kingsmead School Governors and Another CA 13-Dec-2002
The applicants appealed the refusal of judicial review of the refusals of their appeals against exclusion from school.
Held: The Act provided a full appeal procedure from the initial decision of the school’s head teacher, first to the . .
Cited – Centre Reinsurance International Co and Another v Curzon Insurance Ltd ChD 12-Feb-2004
It was a necessary part of the system of statutory transfers of insurance obligations under the Act, that the rights should be transferred before exhaustion of any policy excess, and notwithstanding the insolvency. The rights (inchoate at this . .
Cited – Regina v District Auditor, Gateshead ex parte Judge P CA 8-Nov-1996
The objector sought leave to appeal. He had objected to spending on a war memorial. The district auditor when declining to intervene had given his reasons. The claimant objected that he should have waited before giving those reasons.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v SP CA 21-Dec-2004
The applcant, a girl aged 17 was in a young offender institution. She complained that she had been removed to segregation without first giving her chance to be heard. The respondent argued that there were sufficient post decision safeguards to . .
Cited – Tangney v The Governor of HMP Elmley and Another CA 29-Jul-2005
The claimant was a serving a life sentence. During prison disciplinary proceedings he was refused legal and other assistance, and an outside tribunal on the basis that since any finding would not lead to any loss of remission or extra time, his . .
Cited – Regina v Civil Service Appeal Board, Ex parte Cunningham CA 1991
The court considered the effect of a disciplinary board failing to give reasons. The absence of any right to appeal may be a factor in deciding that reasons should be given. If it is ‘important that there should be an effective means of detecting . .
Cited – Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Colin James Murray QBD 15-Dec-1997
The defendant sought judicial review of his court-martial and of the confirming officers. He said the court should have heard that he committed the offence whist intixicated after taking an anti-malarial drug. The court dd not explain why it had . .
Cited – Betterment Properties (Weymouth) Ltd v Dorset County Council ChD 2-Mar-2007
The company sought an order removing some 46 acres of land from designation as a village green. The claimant sought the amendment of the register. The parties disputed what evidence beyond that available to the committee making the decision should . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Wales Ex Parte Emery CA 9-Jul-1997
The applicant had sought to have included in the definitive map, a local footpath, and now challenged refusal to include it.
Held: A public right of way may be created by dedication or it may be deemed after actual use by the public over . .
Cited – Lawrence v Financial Services Commission PC 14-Dec-2009
lawrence_fscPC2009
(Jamaica) The appellant challenged a fixed penalty notice issued in respect of a financial services allegation, saying that it had been made without him having been allowed opportunity to be heard by an impartial tribunal.
Held: Actions under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Administrative, Natural Justice

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.183208

Regina v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising, Ex Parte Save Our Railways and Others Etc: CA 18 Dec 1995

A requirement that new services should be ‘based upon’ the present timetables did not mean that the services had to be at same level. It was possible that they may be a lesser service, though there should be no significant departures from such timetables.

Citations:

Independent 20-Dec-1995, Times 12-Dec-1995, Times 18-Dec-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Norwich and Peterborough Building Society, Regina (on the Application of) v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd Admn 14-Nov-2002
The Ombudsman had found that the applicant had unfairly failed to notify its customers of the availability of better accounts, once it discontinued accounts of one type. The Society appealed saying that the finding of unfairness arose from matters . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Transport

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.178431

Regina v Lord Saville of Newdigate Right Honourable Sir Edward Somers Right Honourable Justice Hoyt (the Members of Tribunal Sitting As Bloody Sunday Inquiry) ex parte B, O, U and V: Admn 4 Feb 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 104

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Lord Saville of Newdigate and Members of the Tribunal Sitting As Bloody Sunday Inquiry, ex Parte: B; O and U and V CA 30-Mar-1999
A second tribunal of enquiry into a matter was not bound by decisions of the first to give anonymity to witnesses. It must however consider that decision. Such tribunals had to govern their own procedures. Appeals against reasons alone are not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139368

Regina v Crown Court At Cambridge, ex parte Rld Buckland: Admn 13 Jul 1998

There is in law no right to appeal to the Crown Court against a Chief Constable’s refusal to amend the conditions attached to a firearms certificate. The system of applying such conditions was a discrete and separate system. His only remedy was in judicial review.

Citations:

Times 17-Sep-1998, Gazette 26-Aug-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 29 44

Crime, Administrative, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138863

Regina v Cardiff County Council ex parte Sears Group Properties Limited: Admn 13 Mar 1998

It was not unreasonable to require new traffic impact analysis before authorising highway improvement agreement after previous decision made by earlier authority was now five years old.

Citations:

Times 29-Apr-1998, Gazette 29-Apr-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 320

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 278

Administrative

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138441

Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area Authority ex parte AB and CD etc: Admn 10 Jul 1997

The police have power to release limited information about offenders. In this case known paedophiles were staying at a campsite, and their criminal record was disclosed to the site owner. There was no harrassment under s3 of the 1968 Act. On any duty of confidence: ‘I have great difficulty in accepting that the information which the NWP held which enabled them to disclose this connection was the subject of any duty of confidence owed to the applicants. But even if it was it seems to me clear that the circumstances were such as to entitle the NWP to make such disclosure. It is hard to imagine circumstances in which the police could acquire information subject to a duty of confidence which would not have entitled them to disclose that information when the public interest required them to do so. This was, as they judged, such a situation and nothing suggests to me that their judgment was unlawful.’ There was no misfeasance in a public office: ‘it cannot be suggested that in the present case the NWP acted with a deliberate and dishonest intention to abuse their powers and with an intention to injure the applicant or with knowledge that they had no power to disclose information to the site owner. All the evidence shows that they acted in a bona fide belief that disclosure was necessary, to the extent made in the public interest.’ However ‘It is not acceptable that those who have undergone the lawful punishment imposed by the court should be the subject of intimidation and private vengeance, harried from parish to parish like paupers under the old Poor Law. It is not only in their interests but in the interest of society as a whole that they should be enabled and if need be helped, to live normal lives. ‘

Judges:

Lord Bingham CJ and Buxton J

Citations:

Times 14-Jul-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 667, [1997] 3 WLR 724

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Caravan Sites Act 1968 3, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Citing:

Cited – Elliott v Chief Constable of Wiltshire and Others ChD 20-Nov-1996
Vice-Chancellor was asked to consider whether to strike out a statement of claim based upon alleged misfeasance by a police officer in his public office. The allegation against the police officer was that he had deliberately and falsely supplied . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Cited – X (South Yorkshire) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 24-Oct-2012
The offender had twice been convicted of sex assaults against children. He was on the sex offenders register for life subject to a future right to seek de-registration. He now challenged as unlawful, the policy, ‘The Child Sex Offender (CSO) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Police, Human Rights

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137612

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Mehmet; Regina v Same, ex parte O’Connor: QBD 18 Feb 1999

A prisoner’s allocation to a close supervision unit did not require him to be given opportunity to make representations before the move. It was not intended to be punitive, did not delay his release, nor result in worse prison conditions.

Citations:

Times 18-Feb-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.87880

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Hickey and Others, Same Ex Parte Bamber; Same Ex Parte Malone (No 2): QBD 29 Nov 1994

The Home Secretary is obliged to disclose new evidence to a defendant before rejecting his application for a reference to Court of Appeal. The Home Secretary’s powers to refer a case back to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) was an integral part of the just functioning of the overall process of criminal justice. A decision maker may treat submissions about the decision differently if they are only allowed after it has been made when ‘it is difficult to suppose that [a decision maker] can remain as open-minded as if no clear decision has been taken’ and ‘The guiding principle should always be that sufficient disclosure should be given to enable the petitioner properly to present his best case.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Independent 29-Nov-1994, Times 02-Dec-1994, [1995] 1 WLR 734

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Regina v Parole Board and Another ex parte Wilson CA 6-May-1992
It was natural justice to allow a discretionary lifer to see the reports which had been prepared for consideration on his application for release on licence. W had been sentenced to life imprisonment for buggery, and was a discretionary life . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v SP CA 21-Dec-2004
The applcant, a girl aged 17 was in a young offender institution. She complained that she had been removed to segregation without first giving her chance to be heard. The respondent argued that there were sufficient post decision safeguards to . .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Bamber CA 15-Feb-1996
The right of a prisoner to provide a recorded message for a radio station could properly be curtailed. . .
See Also – Bamber v United Kingdom ECHR 11-Sep-1997
The Commission declared inadmissible a complaint that Standing Order 5 G 2B infringed Article 10. The Order precluded prisoners from contacting the media by telephone except in exceptional circumstances. The Standing Order satisfied the requirement . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department (ex parte Bamber) Admn 24-Apr-1998
The applicant was refused leave to apply for judicial review of a decision as to his release made on the basis of his refusal to accept his guilt. . .
See Also – Bamber v Regina CACD 12-Dec-2002
. .
See Also – Bamber, Regina v CACD 14-May-2009
The defendant had been convicted in 1986 of the murder of five members of his adoptive family. The judge had initially recommended a minimum term of 25 years. A later judge had suggested a whole life term. The convictions had been upheld in 2002. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Administrative, Prisons

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.87750

Terence Geoffrey Best and others v Secretary of State for Environment v Bass Holdings Limited v South Somerset District Council v Tesco Stores Limited: Admn 5 Mar 1997

Counsel for an objector in a planning case submitted that the contents of an incoming letter lying in the Department’s postroom were imputedly known to the Secretary of State.
Held: The judge generously described the submission as having an air of unreality.

Judges:

Mr Lockhart-Mummery QC

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 226

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Bushell v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 7-Feb-1980
Practical Realities of Planning Decisions
The House considered planning procedures adopted on the construction of two new stretches of motorway, and in particular as to whether the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully in refusing to allow objectors to the scheme to cross-examine the . .

Cited by:

Cited – National Association of Health Stores and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Department of Health CA 22-Feb-2005
Applications were made to strike down regulations governing the use of the herbal product kava-kava.
Held: The omission of any transtitional provisions had not affected anyone. Nor was the failure to consult as to the possibility of dealing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Administrative

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137171

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Camelot Group Plc: Admn 11 Feb 1997

There is jurisdiction for a civil court to make a declaration as to the criminality of future conduct.

Citations:

[1997] 10 Adm LR 93, [1997] EWHC Admin 360, [1997] EWHC Admin 121, [1997] EWCA Civ 1393

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Litigation Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137066

Regina v Beatrix Potter School ex parte Kanner: Admn 20 Dec 1996

The applicant’s child had been offered a place by the respondent. The offer was withdrawn.
Held: The school when deciding was entitled to look to the need for efficiency in education. On appeal, the committee may go against that need. The appeal committee refused the child’s appeal on the grounds of efficiency. Many more children had applied for places than were available, and many more had succeeded at appeal. The school needed urgently to reduce the numbers, and claimed the offer had been made without authority. Then arrangements were made to increase capacity, and two children who had been offered places withdrew. The appeal was on the ground of the school’s failure to take account of parental choice, and on the legitimate expectation created.
Held: It was impossible to describe the withdrawal of the offer as Wednesbury unreasonable, and the appeal failed.

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 397

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Education Act 1980 6, Education Reform Act 1988 26

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex Parte Matrix Securities Ltd HL 14-Mar-1994
The applicant had obtained what it thought to be clearance from the Revenue for a complex scheme, whose effectiveness depended on whether investors would qualify for capital allowances. The Inspector initially gave a favourable assurance, but that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Administrative

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136945

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Gangadeen: Admn 15 Nov 1996

The Court should not intervene in a minister’s decision in application of his own policy unless he disregarded it, or the decision was inherently irrational.

Judges:

Hirst LJ Swinton Thomas LJ and Sir Brian Neill

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 237, [1998] INLR 206

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Independent Assessor v O’Brien, Hickey, Hickey CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimants had been imprisoned for many years before their convictions were quashed. They claimed compensation under the Act. The assessor said that there should be deducted from the award the living expenses they would have incurred if they had . .
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Gangadeen and Another; Regina v Same ex parte Khan CA 12-Dec-1997
Home Secretary need not always follow own extra statutory concession if reasons given; parent deported though child had residence right.
Home Secretary need not always follow own extra statutory concession if reasons given; parent deported . .
Cited – Mandalia v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 14-Oct-2015
The Court considered the guidance given to UK Border Agency case workers when considering document submitted by persons applying for leave to enter or stay in the UK as foreign students. M had applied to study here, but had not accompanied his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136785

Regina v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration ex parte Balchin: Admn 25 Oct 1996

The petitioners complained that the Secretary of State for Transport was guilty of maladministration in confirming Road Orders without seeking an assurance from Norfolk County Council that the Balchins would be given adequate compensation for the effect of the road on their home. They now challenged the Ombudsman’s report which had rejected their complaint.
Held: The role of the Parliamentary Commissioner ‘as an investigator is not limited to the strict terms of the issue posed by the complaint’. Sedley J accepted that injustice had been widely interpreted: ‘so as to cover not merely injury redressible in a court of law, but also ‘the sense of outrage aroused by unfair or incompetent administration, even where the complainant has suffered no actual loss” It followed ‘that the defence familiar in legal proceedings, that because the outcome would have been the same in any event there has been no redressible wrong, does not run in an investigation by the commissioner.’
The complaimant: ‘does not have to demonstrate, as respondents sometimes suggest is the case, a decision so bizarre that its author must be regarded as temporarily unhinged. What the not very apposite term ‘irrationality’ generally means in this branch of the law is a decision which does not add up – in which, in other words, there is an error of reasoning which robs the decision of logic.’

Judges:

Sedley J

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 152, [1998] 1 PLR 1, [1997] COD 146, [1996] EG 166, [1997] JPL 917

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967

Cited by:

See Also – Regina v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration ex parte Balchin and others Admn 24-May-1999
. .
Cited – Nicholas Cavanagh Raymond Bhatt Frank Redmond v The Health Service Commissioner CA 15-Dec-2005
A parent had complained about the closure of a hospital unit which led to his daughter not receiving treatment. The Commissioner in her report commented adversely on the doctors involved. Both doctors and the parent sought judicial review of the . .
Cited – Equitable Members Action Group, Regina (On the Application of) v Her Majesty’s Treasury Admn 15-Oct-2009
The applicants sought judicial review of the defendant’s response to a report of the Parliamentary Ombudsman finding maladministration by the defendant in rejecting the recommendation for compensation.
Held: The respondent’s rejection of the . .
Cited – The Manydown Company Ltd v Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Admn 17-Apr-2012
The claimant sought judicial review of the Council’s adoption of planning strategy documents.
Held: The request was granted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136700

Broadmoor Hospital Authority and Another v Robinson: CA 20 Dec 1999

Where a body was given statutory duties, it would normally be entitled to orders restraining others from interfering with its performance of those duties. A patient detained under the Act had written a book, and the Hospital had sought to restrain its publication. It was argued that such a restraint went beyond the express powers of the authority. The powers were in public law, but the court might assist. The application went beyond the hospital’s statutory duties, and should be discharged. A secure hospital’s right to prevent a package or letter being sent out by patient did not extend to allow restriction on publication or recovery of book manuscript once it had already left the hospital. There was scope to grant an injunction where it could be shown that behaviour outside the hospital would sufficiently seriously interfere with the hospital’s conduct of its statutory duties, but that did not apply in this case.
Lord Woolf stated said: ‘I would therefore summarise the position by stating that if a public body is given a statutory responsibility which it is required to perform in the public interest, then, in the absence of an implication to the contrary in the statute, it has standing to apply to the court for an injunction to prevent interference with its performance of its public responsibilities and the courts should grant such an application when it appears to the court to be just and convenient to do so.’ and
‘The statutes only rarely provide expressly that a particular public body may institute proceedings in protection of specific public interests. It is usually a matter of implication. If a public body is given responsibility for performing public functions in a particular area of activity, then usually it will be implicit that it is entitled to bring proceedings seeking the assistance of the courts in protecting its special interests in the performance of those functions.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Lord Justice Morritt And Lord Justice Waller

Citations:

Times 09-Feb-2000, Gazette 20-Jan-2000, [2000] QB 775, [2000] 2 All ER 727, [1999] EWCA Civ 3039

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 134

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Broadmoor Hospital Authority v Robinson QBD 12-Oct-1998
A secure hospital’s right to prevent a package or letter being sent out by a patient did not extend to allowing a restriction on publication or recovery of a book manuscript once it had already left the hospital. . .

Cited by:

Cited – H (A Healthcare Worker) v Associated Newspapers Limited CA 27-Feb-2002
The applicant had been a health care worker, but was no longer working. He had come to be HIV positive, and an order was sought protecting his identity from disclosure in the press. He had evidence that the NHS guidelines on notification of patients . .
Appealed to – Broadmoor Hospital Authority v Robinson QBD 12-Oct-1998
A secure hospital’s right to prevent a package or letter being sent out by a patient did not extend to allowing a restriction on publication or recovery of a book manuscript once it had already left the hospital. . .
Cited – Worcestershire County Council v Tongue, Tongue, and Tongue CA 17-Feb-2004
The defendants had been convicted of animal welfare offences, and banned from keeping animals. The claimant sought to enter the premises to remove animals, but were denied entry.
Held: The court had no power to make an order to allow access . .
Cited – Callaghan v Independent News and Media Ltd QBNI 7-Jan-2009
callaghan_inmQBNI2009
The claimant was convicted in 1987 of a callous sexual murder. He sought an order preventing the defendant newspaper publishing anything to allow his or his family’s identification and delay his release. The defendant acknowledged the need to avoid . .
Cited – Rollins, Regina v SC 28-Jul-2010
The court was asked whether the Financial Services Authority had a power to prosecute money laundering offences under the 2002 Act, or whether, as contended by the defendant, its powers were limited to sections under the 2000 Act.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Administrative

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135997

Regina v The Right Honourable Lord Saville of Newdigate, Sir Edward Somers, Mr Justice William Hoyt ex parte A and others: Admn 28 Jul 1999

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Lord Justice Robert Walker, Lord Justice Tuckey

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 747

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – A and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and others CA 28-Jul-1999
Former soldiers who had been involved in the events in Londonderry in 1972, and were to be called to give evidence before a tribunal of inquiry, still had cause to fear from their names being given, and so were entitled to anonymity when giving such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Armed Forces

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135821

Regina (On the Application of Bajram Zeqiri) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 12 Mar 2001

The applicant’s case had been delayed to allow a test case as to whether Germany was to be treated as a safe country for the return of asylum seekers. Before the test case appeal was abandoned, circumstances changed so as to allow certification of Germany. The Home Secretary therefore abandoned the appeal and ordered the return of the applicants to Germany. The applicant challenged the decision saying that the delay of cases to allow the test case to proceed created a legitimate expectation which was not respected by the review.
Held: ‘ . . First and foremost, I agree with the conclusions of Collins J in Artan Gjoka and Shefki Gashi. The provisions as to time in the Dublin Convention are designed to govern the relationship between the parties to it, not to confer rights on applicants for asylum. In the second case, the Dublin Convention does not form part of our domestic law and cannot govern the manner in which the 1996 Act operates’ The Secretary’s decision was unlawful.

Judges:

Lord Phillips MR

Citations:

Times 16-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 342, [2002] Imm AR 296

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Shefki Gashi and Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Artan Gjoka Admn 15-Jun-2000
When dealing with the argument that there had been delay in dealing with the applications which amounted to a breach of the requirement of the Dublin Convention that the application should be dealt with expeditiously: ‘I have no doubt that these . .
Dictum Adopted – Regina v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, ex parte Unilever plc CA 1996
The Revenue had refused to exercise a discretion in favour of the taxpayer in the same form it had granted for over twenty years. The taxpayer complained that this was unfair.
Held: The new approach to late applications, brought in without any . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Lika) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Dec-2002
The applicant was an ethnic Albanian, whose application for asylum had been rejected on the ground that he had passed through Germany. The Dublin Convention did not create rights enforceable by individuals, its purpose is to produce a system which . .
Cited – Rashid, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Jun-2005
The Home Secretary appealed against a grant of a judicial review to the respondent who had applied for asylum. The court had found that two other asylum applicants had been granted leave to remain on similar facts and on the appellants, and that it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Administrative

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135255

Berkeley v Secretary of State For The Environment and Others: HL 11 May 2000

The claimant challenged the grant of planning permission for a new football ground for Fulham Football club, saying that an Environmental Impact Assessment had not been obtained, but was required.
Held: Where a planning application if completed would have a substantial effect on the environment, and an environmental impact assessment should have been first obtained, it was not possible to dispense with that assessment and to deem it to have been supplied where it was thought that the assessment would make no difference, or that the authority or secretary of state in fact had all the information which would have been provided. The Directive prescribed a particular procedure which was to be followed. In the absence of at least substantial compliance, the court should not exercise its discretion to validate retrospectively a breach of the Directive, even if satisfied that the result would have been the same.
Lord Bingham set out the Court’s discretion: ‘Even in a purely domestic context, the discretion of the court to do other than quash the relevant order or action where such excessive exercise of power is shown is very narrow. In the Community context, unless a violation is so negligible as to be truly de minimis and the prescribed procedure has in all essentials been followed, the discretion (if any exists) is narrower still: the duty laid on member states by article 10 of the EC Treaty, the obligation of national courts to ensure that Community rights are fully and effectively enforced, the strict conditions attached by article 2(3) of the Directive to exercise of the power to exempt and the absence of any power in the Secretary of State to waive compliance (otherwise than by way of exemption) with the requirements of the Regulations in the case of any urban development project which in his opinion would be likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of the factors mentioned, all point towards an order to quash as the proper response to a contravention such as admittedly occurred in this case.’
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘A court is therefore not entitled retrospectively to dispense with the requirement of an EIA on the ground that the outcome would have been the same or that the local planning authority or Secretary of State had all the information necessary to enable them to reach a proper decision on the environmental issues. Although section 288(5)(b), in providing that the court ‘may’ quash an ultra vires planning decision, clearly confers a discretion upon the court, I doubt whether, consistently with its obligations under European law, the court may exercise that discretion to uphold a planning permission which has been granted contrary to the provisions of the Directive. To do so would seem to conflict with the duty of the court under article 10 (ex article 5) of the EC Treaty to ensure fulfilment of the United Kingdom’s obligations under the Treaty. In classifying a failure to conduct a requisite EIA for the purposes of section 288 as not merely non-compliance with a relevant requirement but as rendering the grant of permission ultra vires, the legislature was intending to confine any discretion within the narrowest possible bounds. It is exceptional even in domestic law for a court to exercise its discretion not to quash a decision which has been found to be ultra vires: see Glidewell LJ in Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Secretary of State for the Environment (1990) 61 P and CR 343, 353. [Counsel for the Respondent] was in my opinion right to concede that nothing less than substantial compliance with the Directive could enable the planning permission in this case to be upheld.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Bingham

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-2000, [2000] 3 WLR 420, [2001] 2 AC 603, [2000] UKHL 36, [2000] 3 All ER 897

Links:

House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 85/337/EEC, Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1199), Town and Country Planning Act 1990 288(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At First Instance – Dido Berkeley v Secretary of State for Environment Admn 26-Mar-1997
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Barker v London Borough of Bromley Admn 23-Nov-2001
The claimant challenged the grant of outline permission to develop the Crystal Palace, arguing that no Environmental Assessment had taken place. The need for one depended upon whether the directive had been properly incorporated into English Law. . .
Cited – Bown v Secretary of State for Transport CA 31-Jul-2003
The appeal concerned the environmental effect of the erection of a bridge being part of a bypass. It was claimed that the area should have been designated as a Special Protection Area for Birds (SPA), and that if so it should be treated as such for . .
Cited – Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 26-Nov-2003
The claimant sought to quash a planning decision on the basis that a screening decision had not been made.
Held: Though the procedures within the authority could have been bettered, there was no formal requirement for a screening option to . .
Cited – Pascoe v First Secretary of State and others Admn 27-Sep-2006
The claimant challenged a compulsory purchase order made under the 1993 Act on the grounds of underuse of properties in the area.
Held: The respondent’s decision had been made on the basis that there was underuse of a ‘predominant number’ of . .
Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex Parte Milne (2) QBD 31-Jul-2000
Developers submitted applications for outline permission for the development of a business park. The applicant sought to quash the grant on the basis that the environmental assessment was insufficiently detailed, and contained reserved matters, and . .
Cited – Edwards, Regina (on the application of) v Environment Agency HL 16-Apr-2008
The applicants sought to challenge the grant of a permit by the defendant to a company to operate a cement works, saying that the environmental impact assessment was inadequate.
Held: The Agency had been justified in allowing the application . .
Cited – Boggis and Another v Natural England CA 20-Oct-2009
Natural England appealed against the quashing of an SSSI.
Held: The notification of an SSSI was not the making of a plan as respects the land affected, but the flagging up of it. The real purpose of the proceedings was to allow the land owners . .
Cited – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .
Cited – Baker v Police Appeals Tribunal Admn 27-Mar-2013
The claimant a former police constable sought judicial review of a decision made by the tribunal, saying that it had had no jurisdiction to make it. The respondent tribunal, having now accepted that it had not had the power it exercised, being then . .
Cited – Champion, Regina (on The Application of) v North Norfolk District Council and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
‘The appeal concerns a proposed development by Crisp Maltings Group Ltd (‘CMGL’) at their Great Ryburgh plant in Norfolk, in the area of the North Norfolk District Council (‘the council’). It was opposed by the appellant, Mr Matthew Champion, a . .
Cited – Dover District Council v CPRE Kent SC 6-Dec-2017
‘When a local planning authority against the advice of its own professional advisers grants permission for a controversial development, what legal duty, if any, does it have to state the reasons for its decision, and in how much detail? Is such a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Planning, Administrative

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135054