Cheltenham Builders Ltd , Regina (on the Application of) v South Gloucestershire District Council: Admn 10 Nov 2003

A claim was made for the review of a decision of the Council to amend the Register of Town and Village Greens (TVG).
Held: The registration of the TVG was manifestly flawed and could not stand whether under section 14 or by way of judicial review. Available procedures did not enable precisely the same relief to be granted in that judicial review would enable the registration itself to be quashed. Judicial review was still available. There was no question of bypassing the statutory scheme; s.14 did not require permission to be obtained and there were no specific time limits. The date was that of the determination of the application by the registration authority or judgment by the court. That would enable the landowner in all cases to defeat a claim to the existence of a Green by placing a notice in appropriate terms on the land in question after the application has been made or proceedings commenced and before the determination or judgment and accordingly frustrate the purpose of the legislation. In some cases fairness would make an oral hearing not merely an option but a necessity.
Sullivan J considered the concept of ‘locality’ in this context, finding: 1) The word locality in section 22(1A) should be construed as having the same meaning in classes a, b and c; 2) Apart from the doubt expressed by Lord Denning MR in the New Windsor case, the authorities were unanimously to the effect that, at common law, a customary right to indulge in lawful sports and pastimes could exist only for the benefit of some legally recognised administrative division of the county, and that that was the sense in which Parliament used the word locality when defining class b and c village greens in 1965; 3) On any other approach, there would be no practical distinction between a locality and a neighbourhood; 4) Parliament’s belief that the burden placed upon applicants for TVG registration to demonstrate that the users were the inhabitants of any locality was unduly onerous and should be lightened by the introduction of the neighbourhood concept, was entirely in accordance with the (almost) unanimous view expressed in the authorities; 5) A neighbourhood need not be a recognised administrative unit. A neighbourhood must have a sufficient degree of cohesiveness; 6) A locality in the case of class a and class b village greens means an administrative unit, not one or more administrative units, and locality has the same meaning in subsection; 7) When enacting the 2000 Act, Parliament had not intended to create additional obstacles for applicants, but it managed to do so.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2803 (Admin), [2004] JPL 975

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commons Registration Act 1965 14 22(1A)

Cited by:

Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council, Catherine Mary Robinson ChD 22-Jan-2004
Land had been registered in part as a common. The council appealed.
Held: The rights pre-existing the Act had not been lost. The presumption against retrospectively disapplying vested rights applied, and the application had properly been made. . .
Cited – Regina (G) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal; Regina (M) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Admn 25-Mar-2004
The applicants sought judicial review of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal’s refusal of leave to appeal. The court had to decide whether such a right survived section 101 of the 2001 Act.
Held: The right to have a judicial review could only be . .
Disapproved in part – Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others HL 24-May-2006
Application had been made to register as a town or village green an area of land which was largely a boggy marsh. The local authority resisted the application wanting to use the land instead for housing. It then rejected advice it received from a . .
Cited – Paddico (267) Ltd v Kirklees Metropolitan Council and Others ChD 23-Jun-2011
The company sought the rectification of the register of village greens to remove an entry relating to its land, saying that the Council had not properly considered the need properly to identify the locality which was said to have enjoyed the rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Judicial Review

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189123

In re M (Care Proceedings: Judicial Review); In the matter of unborn baby M R; X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire County Council: Admn 15 Apr 2003

Munby J said: ‘If a baby is to be removed from its mother, one would normally expect arrangements to be made by the local authority to facilitate contact on a regular basis . . Those arrangements must be driven by the needs of the family, not stunted by lack of resources. Typically, if this is what the parents want, one will be looking to contact most days of the week and for lengthy periods.’

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2003] 2 FLR 171, [2003] EWHC 850 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (S) v Haringey London Borough Council QBD 13-Nov-2003
The applicant sought a writ of habeas corpus in respect of her four children who had been removed by the police, and were residing with the local authority under interim care orders. She said they were held against their wills.
Held: The . .
Explained – In re S (a child) (Care proceedings: Contact) FD 5-Jul-2005
The one month old baby had been taken into the care of the local authority. The authority appealed the extent of contact with the baby.
Held: The appeal failed. It was not wholly improper to allow for the practicalities of arranging such . .
Cited – G, Regina (on the Application of) v Nottingham City Council Admn 1-Feb-2008
The respondent authority had removed the child from the mother at birth but without first obtaining any court authority. The court had made a peremptory order for the return of the child. The court explained its actions.
Held: Neither social . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Judicial Review

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188378

[2003] EWCA Civ 1113, Times 31-Jul-2003, [2004] 1 WLR 88

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 42

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited by:

See also – Bhamjee v Forsdick and others CA 14-May-2003
. .
Cited – Perotti v Collyer-Bristow (A Firm) CA 21-May-2004
The claimant had been dissatisfied with the way in which the defendant had administered the estate of his deceased uncle. The court had faced 14 applications by him.
Held: ‘They are all totally devoid of merit. They were all made long after . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v Pepin Admn 27-May-2004
Civil proceedings order. The defendant had commenced ten sets of proceedings which the court held amounted to serial and repeated litigation of the same points.
Held: The fact that new details had emerged which might throw new light on the . .
Cited – Thakerar v Lynch Hall and Hornby (a Firm) ChD 21-Oct-2005
An order was sought to declare the claimant to be a vexatious litigant. The respondent answered that some of her applications had succeeded.
Held: It was not necessary to show that all applications by the claimant had been without merit. . .
See Also – Attorney General v Bhamjee Admn 8-Dec-2003
Civil Restraint Order . .
Cited – Attorney General v Perotti Admn 10-May-2006
The respondent had been subject first to a Grepe v Loam order and then to an extended civil restraint order. The court had still faced many hopeless applications. An order was now sought that any future application for permission to appeal be heard . .
Cited – Courtman v Ludlam and Another; In re Ludlam (Bankrupts) ChD 6-Aug-2009
The applicant trustee in bankruptcy sought an extended civil restraint order against the respondents, saying that they had made unmeritorious claims in the proceedings.
Held: The rules required there to be shown that person had ‘persistently . .
Cited – Grace, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 9-Jun-2014
What is ‘totally without merit’?
The claimant had sought judicial review. Her case had been certified as being ‘totally without merit’, thus denying to her any opportunity to renew her application for leave at an oral hearing, leaving only recourse to a judge of the Court of Appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184863

Hampshire County Council v Beer (T/A Hammer Trout Farm); Regina (Beer) v Hampshire Farmers’ Market Ltd: CA 21 Jul 2003

The applicant had been refused a licence to operate within the farmer’s market. It sought judicial review of the rejection, but the respondent argued that it was a private company not susceptible to review.
Held: The decisions of the Farmers Market were open to judicial review. The farmers markets were held on publicly owned land to which the public had access, the company was set up by the council using statutory powers and it stepped into the council’s shoes performing the same functions as the council had previously performed. From the start the council assisted the company by providing facilities and finance. The company was established to take over on a non profit basis the running of markets previously operated by the council in the exercise of its statutory power in what was considered to be the public interest. In that light, the company having taken over a public function, retained a sufficient element of the exercise of a public function to make its decisions susceptible to judicial review: ‘unless the source of power clearly provides the answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law.’
Dyson LJ said: ‘It seems to me that the law has now been developed to the point where, unless the source of power clearly provides an answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law. It may be said with some justification that this criterion for amenability is very broad, not to say question-begging. But it provides the framework for the investigation that has to be conducted. There is a growing body of case law in which the question of amenability to judicial review has been considered. From these cases it is possible to identify a number of features which point towards the presence or absence of the requisite public law element’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson, Lord Justice Longmore and Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1056, Times 25-Aug-2003, [2004] 1 WLR 233

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Take-over Panel, ex parte Datafin PLC CA 1986
Amenability to judicial review
The issue of amenability to judicial review often requires an examination of the nature of the power under challenge as well as its source: ‘In all the reports it is possible to find enumerations of factors giving rise to the jurisdiction [of . .
Cited – Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue CA 27-Apr-2001
The defendant resisted accelerated possession proceedings brought for rent arrears under his assured shorthold tenancy, by a private housing association who was a successor to a public authority.
Held: Once the human rights issue was raised, . .
Cited – Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation CA 21-Mar-2002
The appellants appealed rejection of their application for judicial review. They were long term residents in a nursing home, which the respondents had decided to close.
Held: Though the respondent did exercise some public functions, and its . .
Cited – Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Cited – Regina v HM Treasury, Ex Parte University of Cambridge ECJ 3-Oct-2000
When considering public law governed the procedural requirements for procurement contracts, the court had to consider whether body was financed ‘for the most part’ by public funds. The words referred to the majority of income, and the calculations . .
Cited – Regina v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Hook CA 1976
The applicant applied to have quashed the decision of the local council to exclude him from trading in the market and to revoke his right to have a stall.
Held: He succeeded on the grounds that the decision had been taken in breach of the . .
Cited – Regina v Basildon District Council, ex parte Brown CA 1981
The status of a market was not relevant to the crucial question whether the stallholder’s licence had been validly terminated. The exercise of the powers by the local authority must be governed by the same principles whether in relation to a . .
Cited – Regina v Wear Valley District Council, ex p Binks 1985
The applicant operated a hot food takeaway caravan from a market place. She had no written licence, operating under an informal arrangement with the local authority. Her rights were terminated without notice.
Held: The decision was quashed. It . .
Cited – Regina v Durham County Council, ex parte Robinson 31-Jan-1992
The applicant sought to challenge the decision of the local authority to terminate his stallholder’s licence. The parties had agreed that a sufficient element of public law was involved to give the court jurisdiction to review the decision.
Cited – Regina v Birmingham City Council, ex parte Dredger QBD 22-Jan-1993
The local authority, operators of the market, increased the rents payable by the tenants. The tenants sought a review of the decision.
Held: The act was that of a public authority and was subject to judicial review. The market stall-holders . .
Distinguished – Regina v Servite Houses, London Borough of Wandsworth Council ex parte Louisa Laura Goldsmith, By Her Daughter and Litigation Friend Linda Goldsmith v Florence Nellie Chatting By Her Niece and Litigation Friend Marlene Turner Admn 12-May-2000
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Boyle, Regina (On the Application of) v Haverhill Pub Watch and Others Admn 8-Oct-2009
The claimant had been banned from public houses under the Haverhill Pub Watch scheme. He now sought judicial review of a decision to extend his ban for a further two years. The Scheme argued that it was not a body amenable to judicial review, and . .
Cited – London Borough of Lewisham and Others), Regina (on The Application of) v Assessment and Qualifications Alliance and Others Admn 13-Feb-2013
Judicial review was sought of the changes to the marking systems for GCSE English in 2012.
Held: The claim failed. Though properly brought, the failure was in the underlying structue of the qualification, and not in the respondent’s attempts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184822

The Confederation of Passenger Transport UK v The Humber Bridge Board and the Secretary of State for Transport Local Government and the Regions: CA 25 Jun 2003

Regulations specifying the tolls for the Humber Bridge did not mention a charge for large buses.
Held: The same rules had to be applied in construing statutory instruments as applied in construing statutes. The explanatory note issued with the Regulation made it clear beyond peradventure that the ommission was a clerical error, and the Regulation should be read accordingly. The court allowed reference to an Explanatory Note appended to a statute as in appropriate cases. Reference was made to earlier authorities in which, in relation to primary legislation, resort to such Explanatory Notes was permissible, at least where there was said to be ambiguity or obscurity or a construction which would otherwise lead to absurdity. ‘the same or very similar principles must apply to statutory instruments’. The purpose would be to identify the mischief which the statute or regulation was intended to prevent.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Jonathon Parker

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1842, [2004] QB 310, Times 16-Jul-2003

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Humber Bridge (Revision of Tolls and Vehicle Classification) Order 1997 (1997 No 1950), Humber Bridge (Revision of Tolls and Vehicle Classification) Order 2000 (2000 No 264), Humber Bridge (Revision of Tolls and Vehicle Classification) Order 2002 (2002 No 786)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Confederation of Passenger Transport UK v Humber Bridge Board Admn 1-Nov-2002
Challenge to toll fee for buses over the Humber Bridge. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
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, Litigation Practice, Judicial Review, Constitutional

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184037

Davy v Spelthorne Borough Council: HL 13 Oct 1983

Although section 243(1)(a) provides that the ‘validity’ of an enforcement notice is not to be questioned except as therein provided, the word ‘validity’ is evidently not intended to be understood in its strict sense. It is used to mean merely enforceability. Lord Wilberforce explained the use of the terms ‘private law’ and ‘public law’: ‘The expressions ‘private law’ and ‘public law’ have recently been imported into the law of England from countries which, unlike our own, have separate systems concerning public law and private law. No doubt they are convenient expressions for descriptive purposes. In this country they must be used with caution, for, typically, English law fastens, not upon principles but upon remedies. The principle remains intact that public authorities and public servants are, unless clearly exempted, answerable in the ordinary courts for wrongs done to individuals. But by an extension of remedies and a flexible procedure it can be said that something resembling a system of public law is being developed.’

Judges:

Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, Lord Wilberforce

Citations:

[1984] 1 AC 262, [1983] UKHL 3

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – North West Estates Plc v Buckinghamshire County Council CA 22-May-2003
There had been many attempts to enforce and resist enforcement of a planning notice.
Held: The landowner was not entitled now to challenge the application for injunctive relief, where he had not appealed the validity of the enforcement notice. . .
Applied – Roy v Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster Family Practitioner Committee HL 6-Feb-1992
The respondent had withheld part of the plaintiff’s GP payments saying that he had failed to devote himself full time to his practice. The plaintiff sued, and the defendant sought to strike out his application, saying that his application had to be . .
Cited – Davidson v Scottish Ministers HL 15-Dec-2005
The complainant a prisoner sought an order that he should not be kept in conditions found to be inhumane. He had been detained in Barlinnie priosn. The Crown replied that a mandatory order was not available against the Scottish Ministers.
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Cited – First Real Estates (UK) Ltd v Birmingham City Council Admn 1-May-2009
One of the issues presented by the present case is that of determining whether Birmingham City Council, ‘the Council’, was exercising a public function when deciding to terminate what it described as its arrangements with First Real Estates (UK) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183693

Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed: EAT 27 Jun 1997

News Group Newspapers Ltd had been joined as a party, in order that it could argue the obvious public interest relating to the importance, which has long been accepted in the courts, of the interest, not just of the press but of the public generally, in freedom of reporting and openness in court hearings. Discrimination associated with a gender re-assignment process was not sex discrimination within the Act.

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

[1998] ICR 97, [1997] IRLR 556, [1997] UKEAT 1063 – 96 – 2706

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – P v S and Cornwall County Council ECJ 30-Apr-1996
An employee at an educational establishment told management that he intended to undergo gender reassignment. He was given notice of dismissal.
Held: The scope of the Directive was not confined to discrimination based on the fact that a person . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v A, Secretary of State for Education EAT 2-Oct-2001
The Force appealed findings of sex discrimination against the respondent who had undergone gender reassignment. She required the fact of the procedure to be kept secret. The force refused her application for appointment since they said she would be . .
Cited – Ashton v The Chief Constable of West Mercia Constabulary EAT 27-Jul-2000
Where a dismissal was properly related to poor work performance, the fact that such a deterioration in performance was associated with a gender reassignment process being undergone by the employee, did not make the dismissal sex discrimination. To . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011
Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal
Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183062

Gjini, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Islington: CA 15 Apr 2003

The appellant challenged the respondent’s decision to reduce the amount paid to her by way of asylum support benefit by the amount of child benefit she received.
Held: The applicant had failed to make proper disclosure to the court of the facts underlying her case. Since the case had begun, the Coucil had reviewed its policies and uprated the benefits payable. The evidence placed before the court as to the various benefits rates and calculations was weak. It was not possible to say that the method of calculation used by the Council was irrational or inaccurate, and the appeal was dismissed.

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor, Lord Justice Clarke and Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 558

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Asylum Support (Interim Provisions) Regulations 1999 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Lloyd’s of London 1993
There is a duty to be performed by those who represent applicants for judicial review to make all appropriate enquiries and to disclose to the court all facts material to the application. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180738

Regina (Tucker) v Director General of the National Crime Squad: CA 17 Jan 2003

The applicant was a senior officer seconded to the National Crime Squad. He complained that his secondment had been terminated in a manner which was unfair, and left him tainted without opportunity to reply. He appealed against rejection of his request for judicial review.
Held: The appeal failed. Operational matters within the police service, save disciplinary matters were exempt from judicial review. The squad was a creation of statute, and it is a public body, but that was not enough to make what was a managerial decision, of sufficient public law concern to allow a judicial review. He had not been disciplined, and the appointment was one which would come to an end anyway. ‘The Deputy Director General in sending the Appellant back to his force was not performing a public duty owed to him. The decision taken in relation to the Appellant was specific to him. Other officers were dealt with differently. Some were arrested; some were sent back to be disciplined; one was retained with different duties. But the Appellant was simply sent back. It was a decision tailor-made to him. It was taken because of perceived deficiencies in his skills and conduct as an NCS officer. It was an operational decision taken because it was decided that he fell short of the particular requirements that were necessary to work in the NCS. It had nothing to do with his private life and I reject Mr Westgate’s contention that Article 8 of the ECHR was engaged. ‘

Judges:

Aldous, Scott Baker LJJ, Sir Philip Otton

Citations:

Times 27-Jan-2003, Gazette 13-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 57, [2003] ICR 599, [2003] IRLR 439, [2003] Po LR 9, [2003] ACD 37

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1997 48 55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Tucker, Regina (On the Application of) v National Crime Squad Admn 12-Apr-2002
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to terminate his secondment to the National Crime Squad. It was said that there had been concerns about his management skills after in investigation into drug related offences by co-officers. The . .
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 Derbyshire County Council ex parte Noble 1990
Woolf LJ said: ‘Unfortunately in my view there is no universal test which will be applicable to all circumstances which will indicate clearly and beyond peradventure as to when judicial review is or is not available. It is a situation where the . .
Cited – Malloch v Aberdeen Corporation HL 1971
A common law action for wrongful dismissal can at most yield compensation measured by reference to the salary that should have been paid during the contractual period of notice. Lord Reid said: ‘At common law a master is not bound to hear his . .
Cited – Regina v East Berkshire Health Authority, ex Parte Walsh CA 14-May-1984
A district nursing officer had been dismissed for misconduct. He applied for judicial review. He sought judicial review to quash the decision on the ground that there had been a breach of natural justice and that the district nursing officer had no . .
Cited – Regina v Take-over Panel, ex parte Datafin PLC CA 1986
Amenability to judicial review
The issue of amenability to judicial review often requires an examination of the nature of the power under challenge as well as its source: ‘In all the reports it is possible to find enumerations of factors giving rise to the jurisdiction [of . .
Cited – Leech v Governor of Parkhurst Prison HL 1988
The House was asked whether a disciplinary decision by a governor was amenable to judicial review.
Held: The functions of a governor adjudicating upon disciplinary charges are separate and distinct from his functions in running the prison; . .
Cited – Hopley, Regina (on the Application of) v Liverpool Health Authority and others Admn 30-Jul-2002
The respondent Health Authority had refused to consent to payment to the claimant of damages for personal injury by periodical payments under a with profits structured settlement made under Section 2 of the 1996 Act.
Held: The decision was not . .
Cited – Regina v Crown Prosecution Service Ex Parte Hogg CA 14-Apr-1994
A Crown Prosecution Service prosecutor’s dismissal was not reviewable, his contract was not underpinned by statute. However, even in employment cases the possibility of judicial review cannot always be ruled out. . .
Cited – Regina v Home Secretary, ex parte Hosenball CA 1977
A United States’ citizen was subject to a deportation decision which was held not amenable to judicial review on the ground of national security. He appealed.
Held: Neither a failure to lay rules before Parliament within the allotted time, nor . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .
Cited – O’Leary v The Chief Constable Of The Merseyside Police Admn 9-Feb-2001
The claimant was an inspector in the South Wales Constabulary. He held ‘white ticket’ status which meant that he was in a pool awaiting promotion to chief inspector and that in the ordinary course of events he would be promoted to chief inspector . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178705

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 doctors had to show that it was a medical necessity, and this had to be shown convincingly. The standard of proof was high, though not the criminal standard. To comply with Human Rights law, they also had to show that it was in her best interests. This is a wider test than medical necessity. Despite the applicant’s own expert’s opinion, the standard of proof had been reached in this case.
Dyson LJ said that cross-examination in judicial review cases should be ordered only if it is necessary to enable the court to determine factual issues for itself.

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Rix, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

Times 12-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1789, [2003] 1 WLR 562, [2003] Lloyd’s Rep Med 81, (2003) 72 BMLR 81, [2003] 1 FCR 124, [2003] 1 FLR 667, [2003] Fam Law 160

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re S (Adult Patient: Sterilisation) CA 26-May-2000
The court should decide what is in the best interests of a patient where she was unable to give consent herself. The test of whether what was proposed was within the range of what reasonable and competent medical practitioners might propose, got the . .
Cited – Herczegfalvy v Austria ECHR 24-Sep-1992
The applicant was detained in an institution for mentally deranged offenders. While so detained he was subjected to the forcible administration of food and neuroleptics and to handcuffing to a security bed. He complained of violation of his Article . .
Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Cited – Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1997
The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain . .
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 – Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested; CA 16-Jul-2003
The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not . .
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 – MH, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Department of Health CA 3-Dec-2004
The patient had been detained under the Act and was incapable of making an application for her freedom.
Held: There was a duty on the state to ensure that mechanisms were made available to a patient to apply to review her continued detention . .
Cited – Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) Admn 11-Apr-2005
Each applicant sought judicial review of the refusal of the tribunal to authorise their release from detention under the 1983 Act, saying that the Tribunal had accepted evidence to a lower standard of proof.
Held: Neither the criminal standard . .
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 – AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release.
Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that . .
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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178428

Hopley, Regina (on the Application of) v Liverpool Health Authority and others: Admn 30 Jul 2002

The respondent Health Authority had refused to consent to payment to the claimant of damages for personal injury by periodical payments under a with profits structured settlement made under Section 2 of the 1996 Act.
Held: The decision was not amenable to judicial review because the function being performed by the Health Authority, as it affected the claimant, was a private one.
Pitchford J set out three elements to be identified when considering whether a public body with statutory powers was exercising a public function amenable to judicial review or a private function that was not. These were:
i) Whether the defendant was a public body exercising statutory powers;
ii) Whether the function being performed in the exercise of those powers was a public or a private one; and
iii) Whether the defendant was performing a public duty owed to the claimant in the particular circumstances under consideration.

Judges:

Pitchford J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Tucker) v Director General of the National Crime Squad CA 17-Jan-2003
The applicant was a senior officer seconded to the National Crime Squad. He complained that his secondment had been terminated in a manner which was unfair, and left him tainted without opportunity to reply. He appealed against rejection of his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.175140

Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2002

The applicant sought admission to the UK. In the past he had made utterances which were capable of being racist. He claimed to have recanted, and had given undertakings as to his behaviour. At first instance it was held that the Home Secretary had failed to demonstrate an objective reason for refusing admission. It was a ‘reasons challenge’.
Held: The rules of Judicial review did not require the court to hold that if no reasons for a decision were given there were no reasons in fact. The Home Secretary was satisfied that Mr Farrakhan had expressed anti-Semitic and racially divisive views, and that his admission would risk public disorder. Freedom of expression is important, but article 16 created specific exceptions for aliens, and article 10 was only engaged for people already in the country, and did not affect immigration control, unless the refusal was specifically to used to control the expression of views. The Home Secretary had disclosed sufficient reasons to justify the exclusion, and the exclusion was proportionate.

Judges:

Phillips MR, Potter, Arden LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 606, [2002] 3 WLR 481, [2002] QB 1391

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 1, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 59 60(9), European Convention on Human Rights 10 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Poku v United Kingdom ECHR 1996
. .
Cited – Agee v United Kingdom ECHR 1976
(Commission) The Convention does not create any civil right to nationality or to a right of residence. The Secretary of State had made a deportation order against the applicant, who was a United States citizen, on grounds which included that he had . .
Cited – Piermont v France ECHR 27-Apr-1995
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of P4-2; Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – . .
Appeal from – Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 1-Oct-2001
The applicant challenged the Home Secretary’s decision to exclude him from the UK, on the grounds that his presence would exacerbate tensions between the Jewish and Muslim communities. A balance is to be found between freedom of speech and the need . .

Cited by:

Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171234

British Waterways Board, petition for Judicial Review: OHCS 5 Jul 2001

Motion in a petition for judicial review

Judges:

Lord McCluskey

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 182

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168961

Kharazmi v London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 11 Feb 2002

The claimant was in local authority housing. She was disabled and sought leave to apply for judicial review of the authority’s failure to include her in a priority category for rehousing.
Held: In view of the impending Court of Appeal decision in Wahid, her case may be arguable and she should be given leave to apply for judicial review. The fact that there had been delay whilst alternatives to litigation had been explored was sufficient to justify forgiving the delay in applying.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 132 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21, Housing Act 1996 167

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Wahid) v The London Borough of Tower Hamlets Admn 23-Aug-2001
The applicant sought assistance under the National Assistance Act, in the form of housing. He suffered mental illness and was vulnerable. It was argued that the Act imposed a duty on the authority which was regardless of its budgetary limitations. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168028

Regina (Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre) v The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority: CA 31 Jan 2002

The applicant was undergoing fertility treatment. She wanted to have more than three eggs implanted, but permission for this was refused by the Authority. She sought to challenge that by way of judicial review.
Held: Judicial review was not the right way to challenge a scientific view. The authority is a public one, and its decisions are subject to review, but only as administrative ones. Scientists might disagree about the decision, but it could not be described as irrational.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke and Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

Times 21-Mar-2002, Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 20, [2003] 1 FCR 266

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Quintavalle and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Admn 9-Dec-2008
The claimants wished to challenge licensing decisions made by the respondent, and for a protective costs order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167907

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

Mahon, Regina (on the Application of) v Taunton County Court: Admn 13 Dec 2001

Application for leave to apply for judicial review of a decision of a county court judge. The claim was as to the refusal of a licence to the claimant to work as a taxi driver.
Held: Leave was refused.
Hooper J said: ‘This case and another case were listed before me because the Administrative Court Office have been receiving a number of applications for judicial review in circumstances where a claimant is seeking a judicial review of a decision of a county court judge to refuse permission to appeal on the grounds that the judge was wrong to refuse that permission. Other than in the exceptional circumstances to which I have referred, judicial review is not a remedy open to unsuccessful applicants who are prevented from appealing to a higher court by virtue of section 54(4) of the Access to Justice Act 1999.’

Judges:

Hooper J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 1078

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 54(4)

Cited by:

Cited – Ogunbiyi, Regina (on The Application of) v Southend County Court and Another Admn 19-Mar-2015
Application for judicial review of a decision of a Circuit Judge at the County Court, (a) refusing permission to appeal again the judgment of a Deputy District Judge following a trial of the claim for damages again the claimant under a hire purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167365

Regina (on the Application of Sivasubramaniam) v Wandsworth County Court: Admn 13 Dec 2001

The applicant sought to appeal against a refusal of leave to appeal against an arbitration. There had been some delay for the applicant’s health.
Held: Leave to appeal having been refused there was no further right of appeal under the 1999 Act. A court will not entertain judicial review proceedings where an alternative remedy subsists.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hooper

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 1079

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 54(1)

Cited by:

Appeal from – Sivasubramaniam v Wandsworth County Court, Management of Guildford College of Further and Higher Education and Another CA 28-Nov-2002
Having had various claims made in county courts rejected, the applicant was then refused leave to appeal. He sought judicial review of the refusal to give leave to appeal, and now appealed the refusal of leave to apply for a judicial review.
Applied – Gregory and Gregory v Turner, Turner; Regina (Morris) v North Somerset Council CA 19-Feb-2003
The parties were involved in a boundary dispute. One granted an enduring power of attorney, and sought to appear as a litigant in person through the power.
Held: The right of a litigant in person to represent himself was a personal right, and . .
Applied – Regina on the Application of M v Immigration Appeal Tribunal; Regina (G) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal CA 16-Dec-2004
The appellants sought judicial review of the refusal of asylum. They sought leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal, but that had been refused. They then sought a statutory review by a judge of the Administrative division. That review . .
Applied – Cart, Regina (on The Application of) v The Upper Tribunal and Others CA 23-Jul-2010
The claimant had sought and been refused judicial review of a decision of the SIAC Upper Tribunal. The Upper Tribunals were designated as courts of superior record, and the court at first instance had said that SIACs specialist procedures and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167366

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

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

Regina v Ssat Chairman Ex Parte O’Hara: QBD 7 Dec 1994

Chairman’s refusal to allow renewal of an appeal out of time for a claimant with Down’s syndrome was not Wednesbury unreasonable. The regulations expressly forbade a renewal of such an application once refused.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88680

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Ex parte Challenger: QBD 11 Jul 2000

An order was due to come into effect, and there was to be a public enquiry. The applicants sought review of the decision not to provide legal assistance for local objectors, on the grounds that it would prejudice their rights under the Human Rights Act, alleging breach of their rights to a fair trial by inequality of arms.. The court held that it would not be correct to allow a judicial review to give current effect to an Act which itself had not yet come into effect.

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88623

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Ex Parte Bulger: QBD 7 Mar 2001

The family of a murder victim has no standing to intervene to challenge the tariff set for the sentence to be served by the youths convicted of the murder. They had been invited to state the impact of their son’s death, but not the sentence to be served. Although the standing required for judicial review was now generally lower, the fact of having made representations did not give them any such standing. When fixing the tariff of sentence to be served by a youth, the court must look on each occasion also at questions of rehabilitation.

Citations:

Times 07-Mar-2001, [2001] 3 All E R 449

Statutes:

Children and Young Persons Act 1933 44, Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 82A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice Admn 21-Nov-2003
The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve.
Held: In exercising this function, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88628

Regina v Leicester Crown Court, ex parte Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 23 Feb 2001

An order made by a judge that the prosecution pay the defence’s costs, which had been unnecessarily incurred after a failure properly to disclose evidence to them, was an order made as part of the Crown Court trial, and so was not susceptible to judicial review.

Citations:

Times 23-Feb-2001

Statutes:

Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 19, Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1335)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Costs, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88533

Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 1 Oct 2001

The applicant challenged the Home Secretary’s decision to exclude him from the UK, on the grounds that his presence would exacerbate tensions between the Jewish and Muslim communities. A balance is to be found between freedom of speech and the need for public order. He agreed to sign an undertaking in the form requested by the Secretary, and had been admitted to Israel after signing a similar document. The Home Secretary no longer suggested he would use the opportunity to create tension, and there was no suggestion that other, secret, matters had affected the decision. The greater the interference of a decision with the human rights of the applicant, the more intense should be the scrutiny of the courts in reviewing that decision. In this case, the Home Secretary failed to establish ‘objective justification’ for his decision to continue the exclusion of the claimant from the United Kingdom.

Judges:

Mr Justice Turner

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 781

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 1

Citing:

Cited by:

Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Appeal from – Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 30-Apr-2002
The applicant sought admission to the UK. In the past he had made utterances which were capable of being racist. He claimed to have recanted, and had given undertakings as to his behaviour. At first instance it was held that the Home Secretary had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights, Judicial Review

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166234

Edwards, Regina (on the Application Of) v Environment Agency and Another: Admn 2 Apr 2004

The claimant challenged the granting of permission to a cement factory to change its energy systems to be operated by the burning of waste tyres. The respondent was concerned as to the standing of the claimant. He was impecunious, but associated with a woman who was a leading light in the campaign and relatively well off.
Held: ‘Mr Edwards has a sufficient interest in the decision to issue the Permit even if he is temporarily homeless, because as an inhabitant of Rugby he will be affected by any adverse impact on the environment which the trials on the use of tyre chips may have.’

Judges:

Keith J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 736 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000, Supreme Court Act 1981 31(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At First Instance – Edwards and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Environment Agency and Others (No 2) SC 11-Dec-2013
The court considered the consequences of a finding that the UK was in breach of the Aarhus Convention, as regards the ‘prohibitively expensive’ cost of proceedings. The Agency had given permission for the change of fuel for a cement works to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Judicial Review, Legal Aid

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.198212

Practice Statement (Judicial review: Costs): Admn 17 May 2004

The general rule under the Civil Procedure Rules that when a court order was silent as to costs, no party would be liable for the costs of another party did not apply in applications for leave to proceed on a judicial review. An order made on such an application would carry by implication an order for costs in cause.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

Times 20-May-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.197753

England and Wales

Education, Judicial Review

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147471

Robert and Sonia Burkett, Application for Permission To Apply for Judicial Review: CA 13 Dec 2000

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 321

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal heard – Berkeley v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames CA 29-Jun-2001
There is no obligation to refer every application to the Secretary of State where an objector raised a plausible argument that an environmental impact assessment might be needed. In this case the application did not fall within Schedule I, and nor . .

Cited by:

Leave Appelication – Berkeley v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames CA 29-Jun-2001
There is no obligation to refer every application to the Secretary of State where an objector raised a plausible argument that an environmental impact assessment might be needed. In this case the application did not fall within Schedule I, and nor . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147354

Appeal from – Regina v Worcester Health Authority ex parte Kidderminster and District Community Health Council Admn 18-Jan-1999
. .
Cited – Regina v Cardiff City Council ex parte Gooding Investments Admn 1996
. .
Cited – Regina v Hillingdon Health Authority ex parte Goodwin 1984
Woolf J said: ‘Whenever there has to be consultation, there has to be an indication of what there is to be consultation about; and, although an authority must enter into the consultation without a closed mind, it seems to me that there is nothing . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority; North Devon Healthcare NHS Trust ex parte Pow, Geall and Ridd Admn 4-Aug-1997
The health authority had taken their decision on the future of a hospital without consultation and sought to rely on regulation 18(3), arguing that the ‘decision ha[d] to be taken without allowing time for consultation.’
Held: That argument . .
Cited – Nichol v Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1988
Gateshead, confronted by a falling birth rate and therefore an inability to sustain a viable sixth form in all its secondary schools, decided to set up sixth form colleges instead. Local parents had failed to establish that Gateshead’s prior . .
Cited – Regina v Customs and Excise Commissioners, Ex Eurotunnel Plc and Others QBD 23-Feb-1995
A Judicial Review application remained time barred despite leave having been given to apply out of time. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.146440

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Meneiza Rivelino: CA 5 May 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1341

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Immigration

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.146256

Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994, Consumer Protection Act 1987, Council Directive 73/23/EEC, European Communities Act 1972 2(2)

Judicial Review, European

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140239

Regina v The Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Samaroo: Admn 20 Dec 2000

Judges:

Thomas J

Citations:

[2000] EWHC Admin 435

Links:

Cited by:

Distinguished – Hampshire County Council v Beer (T/A Hammer Trout Farm); Regina (Beer) v Hampshire Farmers’ Market Ltd CA 21-Jul-2003
The applicant had been refused a licence to operate within the farmer’s market. It sought judicial review of the rejection, but the respondent argued that it was a private company not susceptible to review.
Held: The decisions of the Farmers . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140153

Regina v Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited ex parte Huddlestone: Admn 28 Jul 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 745

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited by:

See Also – Regina v Durham County Council ex parte Rodney Huddleston Admn 17-Aug-1999
Variation of interim injunction to allow works preparatory to development pending appeal against refusal of planning permission. . .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council Ex Parte Huddleston QBD 28-Jan-2000
A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. It was held however that where . .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council and Others Ex Parte Huddleston CA 15-Mar-2000
A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. The UK system appeared not to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Judicial Review

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.140009

Housing Act 1957

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited by:

Cited – Manchester City Council v Cochrane and Cochrane CA 21-Dec-1998
The tenants held an introductory tenancy under the Act. The council sought possession, after giving notice, and after its review under the Act. The tenants objected, but the Council denied the right of the County Court to hear the objection, arguing . .
Cited – Boddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
Cited – Roy v Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster Family Practitioner Committee HL 6-Feb-1992
The respondent had withheld part of the plaintiff’s GP payments saying that he had failed to devote himself full time to his practice. The plaintiff sued, and the defendant sought to strike out his application, saying that his application had to be . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Doran v Liverpool City Council CA 3-Mar-2009
The claimant sought to set aside an order requiring him to give up possession of a caravan pitch held under the 1968 Act.
Held: The decision to serve a notice to quit which was reasonable on the facts known to the local authority at the time . .
Cited – Valentines Homes and Construction Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs CA 31-Mar-2010
The claimant had applied for judicial review of a decision by the defendant to seek to recover a debt from them. The issue had however been settled in the County Court. Costs were ordered against them, and they now appealed. In a small company the . .
Cited – Coombes, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another Admn 8-Mar-2010
The landlord council brought proceedings for possession. The tenant (C) had remained in possession after his mother’s death, but enjoyed no second statutory succession. He had lived there since 1954 when he was six. C sought a declaration of . .
Cited – North Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others QBD 2-Jul-2010
Delayed Rates Claims Service made them Defective
The council claimed that the defendants were liable for business rates. The defendants said that the notices were defective in not having been served ‘as soon as practicable’, and further that they should not be enforced since the delay had created . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Cited – Ruddy v Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police and Another SC 28-Nov-2012
The pursuer said that he had been assaulted whilst in the custody of the responder’s officers. He began civil actions after his complaint was rejected. He repeated the allegation of the assault, and complained also as to the conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Judicial Review, Housing

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.181810

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Others: QBD 17 Dec 2002

The applicant sought an advisory order from the court to interpret the meaning of United Nations Security Council resolution no 1441 with regard to steps to be taken under the resolution in the event of the failure of Iraq to comply.
Held: A review was granted, but the court then declined to allow itself jurisdiction to interpret an international resolution of this sort, when necessarily the issues at stake were not ones of British law. A domestic court sought to assert itself as to the application of English law within the jurisdiction, but not outside it. An attempt to do so would be likely also to damage public interest in the field of international law. An order was made limiting the costs to andpound;25,000. The court considered the principle ‘whereby the court has no jurisdiction to declare the true interpretation of an international instrument which has not been incorporated into English domestic law and which it is unnecessary to interpret for the purposes of determining a person’s rights and duties under domestic law’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Maurice Kay, Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

Times 27-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2759 (QB)

Links:

Armed Forces, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138688

Regina v Devon County Council ex parte Violet Cornish: Admn 25 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 232

Links:

Bailii

Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138353

Regina v Legal Services Ombudsman and Secretary To Office of Legal Services Ombudsman ex parte E: Admn 23 Feb 1998

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 220

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1991 41

Legal Aid, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138341

Regina v Stoke on Trent County Court ex parte Deborah Ann Mary Wootton-Daws: Admn 2 Feb 1998

Leave to bring judicial review refused.

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 132

Links:

Bailii

Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138253

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Lancashire County Council ex parte Huddleston CA 1986
The respondent council had failed to allocate a university student grant to the claimant and the principle was directed at the duty of that authority to state clearly the reasons for its refusal and the particular factors that had been taken into . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137668

England and Wales

Judicial Review

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.87722

Regina v Somerset County Council, ARC Southern Limited ex parte Richard Dixon: Admn 18 Apr 1997

Judges:

Sedley J

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 393, [1998] Env LR 111

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Disputed – Regina v Canterbury Council ex parte Springimage Limited 1993
The court granted locus standi to an applicant to object to a grant of planning permission by way of an application for judicial review. The applicant had an option to purchase land nearby.
David Keene QC said: ‘It seems to me to be clear that . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 29-Nov-2002
The League challenged the respondent’s statement in the Prisons’ Handbook that children held in young offender institutions were not subject to the protection of the 1989 Act.
Held: Neither the Prison Act and Rules excluded the Prison . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Local Government, Planning

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137338

Judicial Review

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78528