Category: Judicial Review

Wheeler, Regina (on the Application of) v Office of the Prime Minister and Another: Admn 2 May 2008

The applicant sought leave to bring judicial review of the prime minister’s decsion not to hold a referendum on the ratification of the treaty of Lisbon.
Held: The claimant had arguable points under the 2000 Act and otherwise, and permission was granted for the review to be heard.

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 936 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 101

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General of Hong Kong v Ng Yuen Shiu PC 21-Feb-1983
An illegal entrant into Hong Kong claimed that he was entitled by a legitimate expectation to a hearing before a deportation order might be made against him, there having been an announcement that persons in the respondent’s position would be . .
Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Cited – Regina (Nadarajah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Abdi v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 22-Nov-2005
The asylum applicant challenged a certificate given by the respondent that the claim for asylum was manifestly ill-founded. The respondent had made a mistake in applying the appropriate policy, but had sought to correct the error. The claimants . .
Cited – McWhirter and Gouriet, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 5-Mar-2003
Application for leave to appeal against refusal of judicial review of decision to allow ratification of the Treaty of Nice.
Held: Refused. The application concerned matters which were not justiciable. Laws LJ accepted the submission of the . .
Cited – Regina on the Application of Southall and Another v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 14-Jul-2003
The claimant sought a declaration that the Treaty of Nice should not be ratified unless and until the consent of the people had been sought in a referendum. Silber J had refused permission to apply for judicial review.
Held: The appeal was . .
Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Treasury, Ex parte Smedley CA 19-Dec-1984
The applicant sought, as a taxpayer, to object to the proposed payment of andpound;121m to the European Community without an Appropriation Act, but under an Order in Council. The claim was that a draft Order in Council laid by the Treasury before . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents Ltd 1989
The taxpayer complained of a change in Inland Revenue practice which, it said, went against a legitimate expectation created by the scheme.
Held: Judge J said: ‘There is a detailed procedure for resolving disputes between the Inland Revenue . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents Ltd CA 1990
Legitimate Expectation once created not withdrawn
The claimant said that a change of practice by the Revenue was contrary to a legitimate expectation.
Held: The Inland Revenue could not withdraw from a representation if it would cause: substantial unfairness to the applicant; if the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Wheeler, Regina (on the Application of) v Office of the Prime Minister and Another Admn 25-Jun-2008
The claimant sought to challenge the decision by respondent not to offer a referendum before acceding to the Treaty of Lisbon. The claimant’s case was that the Government’s promise to hold a referendum in relation to the European Union . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, European, Constitutional

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.267416

Regina v Mayor, Commonalty and Citizens of the City of London, ex parte Matson: CA 18 Aug 1995

The court considered the need to give reasons for the election of Aldermen.

Judges:

Neill LJ, Waite LJ, Swinton Thomas LJ

Citations:

(1996) 8 Admin LR 49, [1997] 1 WLR 765, [1996] COD 161, 94 LGR 443

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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 . .

Cited by:

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 – 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.

Local Government, Judicial Review

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.249851

Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov: CA 14 Nov 1995

The applicant, having moved here from Greece, applied for emergency housing. The Council received no reply to its requests for corroboration sent to Greece. Housing was refused, but the officer later suggested that the real reason was that the applicant had accommodation available in Greece. The court considered an affidavit on behalf of the decision-maker explaining that the true reasons for the decision where not those expressed in the decision letter but different reasons set out in the affidavit.
Held: A Local Authority cannot later change the reasons given for a finding of intentional homelessness. The courts are not receptive to ex post facto justification of decisions.
Hutchinson LJ considered the circumstances in which it was appropriate to admit and rely upon evidence adduced for the purpose of explaining or adding to the reasons for a decision made by a decision-maker, and said: ‘The Court can and, in appropriate cases, should admit evidence to elucidate or, exceptionally, correct or add to the reasons; but should, consistently with Steyn LJ’s observations in ex p Graham, be very cautious about doing so. I have in mind cases where, for example, an error has been made in transcription or expression, or a word or words inadvertently omitted, or where the language used may be in some way lack in clarity. These examples are not intended to the exhaustive, but rather to reflect my view that the function of such evidence should generally be elucidation not fundamental alteration, confirmation not contradiction.’
Hutchinson LJ expressed the general principle: ‘While it is true, as Schiemann J recognised in Ex p Shield, that judicial review is a discretionary remedy and that relief may be refused in cases where, even though the ground of challenge is made good, it is clear that on reconsideration the decision would be the same, I agree with Rose J’s comments in Ex p Carpenter that, in cases where the reasons stated in the decision letter have been shown to be manifestly flawed, it should only be in very exceptional cases that relief should be refused on the strength of reasons adduced in evidence after the commencement of proceedings. Accordingly, efforts to secure a discretionary refusal of relief by introducing evidence of true reasons significantly different from the stated reasons are unlikely to succeed.’

Judges:

Hutchinson LJ

Citations:

Times 20-Nov-1995, [1996] 2 All ER 302, [1995] EWCA Civ 42, (1996) 28 HLR 819, [1996] COD 391, (1996) 8 Admin LR 389, [1996] 2 FCR 208, (1996) 160 JP Rep 814

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1995 64

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .

Cited by:

Cited – Eston Bernard v London Borough of Enfield CA 4-Dec-2001
The applicant sought review of a decision by the local authority that he was intentionally homeless through a failure to pay his rent. He appealed a rejection of leave to appeal, and his appeal was with regard to the adequacy of the reasons given by . .
Distinguished – Freeserve Com Plc, Regina (on the Application Of) v Customs and Excise Admn 31-Oct-2003
The applicant sought to challenge a decision of the respondent not to charge a US competitor trading within the UK to VAT. They complained that the decision had been affected by irrelevant considerations.
Held: A supplier making supplies from . .
Cited – Richardson and Orme v North Yorkshire County Council CA 19-Dec-2003
The claimants appealed against an order dismissing their application for a judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission. They contended that a councillor with an interest in the matter had wrongfully not been excluded from the . .
Cited – Wall, Regina (on the Application of) v Brighton and Hove City Council Admn 2-Nov-2004
Application for judicial review, seeking an order quashing a grant of planning permission dated by the defendant for the demolition of an existing house and its replacement by eight self-contained apartments. The notice granting planning permission . .
Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v GB and Others CA 22-Aug-2001
When an appeal was lodged against the decision of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal, it was wrong for that Tribunal later to expand on its reasons, save in exceptional circumstances. Parental preference was not an overriding consideration, . .
Cited – Machado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment CA 19-May-2005
At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold . .
Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v South West Strategic Health Authority Admn 28-Oct-2008
The claimant said that whilst resident in a care home, her care should have been paid for as health care under ‘Continuing Health Care.’ She said that the decision maker had failed to comply with the Health Authorities guidelines.
Held: In . .
Applied – Leung v Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Admn 5-Jul-2002
Silber J considered the circumstances in which it was proper to take into account additional evidence surrounding the circumstances in which a decision under challenge had been made. He added to those in Ermakov the issue of whether it would be just . .
Cited – Regina (Ashbrook) v East Sussex County Council CA 20-Nov-2002
The claimant complained that the respondent had failed properly to secure removal of an admitted obstruction to a public footpath. The landowner had applied for a diversion of the footpath, which the respondent recommended for adoption, but the . .
Cited – Clive Rees Associates, Solicitors, Regina (on The Application of) v Swansea Magistrates Court and Another Admn 30-Nov-2011
The claimant solicitors challenged a decision of the respondents to transfer legal aid orders for the representation of clients to a second frm of solicitors.
Held: The court considered the various cases, finding three decisions unlawful and . .
Cited – Nzolameso v City of Westminster SC 2-Apr-2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she . .
Cited – Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills v The Interim Executive Board of Al-Hijrah School CA 13-Oct-2017
Single Sex Schooling failed to prepare for life
The Chief Inspector appealed from a decision that it was discriminatory under the 2010 Act to educate girls and boys in the same school but under a system providing effective complete separation of the sexes.
Held: The action was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.88304

Regina v Birmingham Coroner’s Court Ex Parte Najada: CA 4 Dec 1995

At the inquest, the coroner had quizzed the applicant about his evidence but had not warned him, as he was required to do, about the possibility of self incrimination. The doctor then sought a review of the coroner’s verdict. The coroner now applied to have the judicial review adjourned pending the conclusion of other, criminal proceedings.
Held: It was for the person seeking to have a judicial review adjourned to justify the request. The applicant had a right to have it said that the coroner’s verdict had had A judicial review case should normally to be heard straight away, but it may be delayed to await the outcome of a criminal trial. If the applicant succeded at the criminal trial, the judicial review need not proceed in any event. The judge’s order adjourning the judicial review was upheld.

Judges:

Neill, Auld, Iain Glidewell LJJ

Citations:

Times 05-Dec-1995, Ind Summary 04-Dec-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Coroners

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.86140

Regina v Panel of Takeovers and Mergers ex parte Fayed: CA 1992

Steyn LJ said of the reviewability of decisions of the Director of Public Prosecutions: ‘. . it seems to me that, in the absence of evidence of fraud, corruption or mala fides, judicial review will not be allowed to probe its decision to charge individuals in criminal proceedings. The law must take a practical view of the limits of judicial review. It would be unworkable to extend judicial review into this field.’
Neill LJ said that the court has a discretion to stay civil proceedings until related criminal proceedings have been determined: ‘It is clear that the court has power to intervene to prevent injustice where the continuation of one set of proceedings may prejudice the fairness of the trial of other proceedings . . But it ‘is a power which has to be exercised with great care and only where there is a real risk of serious prejudice which may lead to injustice.’

Judges:

Steyn LJ, Neill LJ

Citations:

[1992] BCC 524

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – JJ Manangement Llp and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs and Another Admn 25-Jul-2019
Challenge to the lawfulness of an investigation by HMRC of tax affairs relating to the claimant’s businesses in Europe. HMRC had been claiming a right to conduct an informal investigation using the 2005 Act. The taxpayer sought judicial review of . .
Cited – JJ Management Consulting Llp and Others v Revenue and Customs CA 22-Jun-2020
HMRC has power to conduct informal investigation
The taxpayer, resident here, but with substantial oversea business interests, challenged the conduct of an informal investigation of his businesses under the 2005 Act, saying that HMRC, as a creature of statute, are only permitted to do that which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.651923

JJ Manangement Llp and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 25 Jul 2019

Challenge to the lawfulness of an investigation by HMRC of tax affairs relating to the claimant’s businesses in Europe. HMRC had been claiming a right to conduct an informal investigation using the 2005 Act. The taxpayer sought judicial review of their actions.
Held: The request for review was refused. The statute gave to the revenue functions including both to open an enquiry into a return under the 1970 Act during the enquiry window, and to check returns without opening a section 9A enquiry, even after the enquiry window had closed, to see if there was cause to make a discovery assessment. Such checks might include not only rereading the file but also undertaking investigations and enquiries to obtain more information to satisfy their interests.
HMRC’s functions include the collection of taxes, and collecting the correct amount of tax from taxpayers. Investigating whether a taxpayer has declared all his income and paid the correct amount of tax is necessary, expedient, incidental or conducive to the exercise of that function and is authorised by the powers in section 9 CRCA 2005. The use of such an ‘informal investigation’ was not inconsistent with the statutory scheme, but was consistent with it. The statutory scheme includes not only opening an enquiry into a return under section 9A TMA 1970 during the enquiry window, but also checking returns without opening a section 9A enquiry, including after the enquiry window has closed, with a view to ascertaining if there is ground to issue a discovery assessment, and that such checking can include not just rereading the file but carrying out investigations and enquiries to see if any further information can be obtained that sheds light on the question. Given that statutory scheme, there is nothing inconsistent in HMRC having power to ask a taxpayer for information and documents on a voluntary basis. It would be the very antithesis of good administration for an arm of the state to use compulsory powers as a first step in obtaining information from an individual, rather than resort to them only when all attempts to obtain the information voluntarily had run into the sand. As a matter of common sense, cooperation and collaboration facilitates the collection of the public revenue.
Judicial review in relation to a decision to investigate will only be justified in a wholly exceptional case, and the circumstances of this case did not meet that threshold, concluding, ‘there is nothing sufficiently egregious about the present case which would justify taking the wholly exceptional course of reviewing that decision’.

Judges:

Nugee J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 2006 (Admin), [2020] 2 WLR 195, [2019] ACD 108, [2019] STC 1772, [2019] WLR(D) 493

Links:

Bailii,

Statutes:

Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 9(1), Taxes Management Act 1970 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Panel of Takeovers and Mergers ex parte Fayed CA 1992
Steyn LJ said of the reviewability of decisions of the Director of Public Prosecutions: ‘. . it seems to me that, in the absence of evidence of fraud, corruption or mala fides, judicial review will not be allowed to probe its decision to charge . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – JJ Management Consulting Llp and Others v Revenue and Customs CA 22-Jun-2020
HMRC has power to conduct informal investigation
The taxpayer, resident here, but with substantial oversea business interests, challenged the conduct of an informal investigation of his businesses under the 2005 Act, saying that HMRC, as a creature of statute, are only permitted to do that which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.640128

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) Limited, ‘FRE’, for the provision of temporary accommodation for those whom the Council was obliged to house in accordance with Part VII of the Housing Act 1996.

Judges:

Plender J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 817 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Housing, Local Government

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.346236

Young, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: Admn 12 Apr 2002

The court considered the proposed diversion of a public footpath.
Held: ‘ the expression ‘substantially less convenient to the public’ is eminently capable of finding a satisfactory meaning by reference to consideration of such matters as the length, difficulty of walking and purpose of the path. Those are features which readily fall within the presumed contemplation of the draftsman of this section as falling within the natural and ordinary meaning of the word ‘convenient’.’
The inspector had conflated the concept of convenience with the concept of expediency as contained within the subsection.

Judges:

Turner J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 844 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 119

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Land

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.251512

Regina v Greater London Council ex Parte Blackburn: 1976

The making of an order of prohibition was postponed to allow the defendant Council to take certain action.

Citations:

[1976] 1 WLR 550, [1976] 3 All ER 184

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Benjamin, Vanderpool and Gumbs v The Minister of Information and Broadcasting and The Attorney General for Anguilla PC 14-Feb-2001
PC (Anguilla) A first non-religious radio station had been formed, but came to include much criticism of the government. One programme was suspended by the government. The programme makers complained that this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.182062

Michalak v General Medical Council and Others: SC 1 Nov 2017

Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in her favour. The GMC now said that the availability of judicial review excluded her right to commence proceedings before the Employment Tribunal by virtue of section 120 of the 2010 Act.
Held: The GMC’s appeal failed. Judicial review in the context of the present case is not in the nature of an appeal. Nor is it a remedy provided by reason of an enactment.

Judges:

Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Mance DPSC, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore;, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes JJSC

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 71, [2017] 1 WLR 4193, (2018) 159 BMLR 1, [2018] 1 All ER 463, [2018] ICR 49, [2018] IRLR 60, [2017] WLR(D) 734, UKSC 2016/0084

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2017 07 04 am Video, SC 2017 07 04 pm Video, Bailii Summary

Statutes:

Equality Act 2010 120(7), Senior Courts Act 1981 31(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At EAT – The General Medical Council v Dickson, Haywood, Dr Michalak EAT 25-Nov-2014
The Claimant complained to an Employment Tribunal that she had been discriminated against by the GMC (a qualifications body). The GMC contended that section 120(7) Equality Act precluded jurisdiction, since judicial review afforded an appeal for the . .
See Also – Michalak, Regina (on The Application of) v General Medical Council Admn 22-Jul-2011
Dr M sought judicial review of a decision by the respondent to continue its investigation of her by the Fitness to Practice panel. That panel, after hearing substantial evidence had to restart on the panel medical member was unable to continue with . .
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 . .
Cited – Pham v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2015
The court was asked: ‘whether the Secretary of State was precluded under the British Nationality Act 1981 from making an order depriving the appellant of British citizenship because to do so would render him stateless. This turns on whether (within . .
Cited – Keyu and Others v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another SC 25-Nov-2015
The Court was asked whether the respondents should be required to hold a public inquiry into a controversial series of events in 1948, when a Scots Guards patrol was alleged to shot and killed 24 unarmed civilians in a village called Batang Kali, in . .
Appeal from – Michalak v The General Medical Council and Others CA 23-Mar-2016
The court considered the remedies and routes of appeal available to individuals who claim to have suffered from discrimination, victimisation, harassment or detriment in the treatment that they have received from a qualifications body. In . .
Cited – Khan v General Medical Council CA 11-Apr-1994
The appellant’s application for full registration as a qualified medical practitioner had been refused by the GMC after a five-year maximum period of limited registration. His application for full registration in accordance with section 25 of the . .
Cited – Tariquez-Zaman v General Medical Council EAT 20-Dec-2006
EAT Race Discrimination – Discrimination by other bodies
Practice and Procedure – Amendment
(a) The Employment Tribunal correctly held it had no jurisdiction to hear Claimant’s case brought under the . .
Dictum disapproved – Jooste v General Medical Council and Others EAT 4-Jul-2012
EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Indirect
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke
Costs
The Employment Judge correctly struck out the Claimant’s claims as having no . .
Cited – The Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .
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 . .
Cited – Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
Cited – Datec Electronics Holdings Ltd and others v United Parcels Services Ltd HL 16-May-2007
The defendants had taken on the delivery of a quantity of the claimant’s computers. The equipment reached one depot, but then was lost or stolen. The parties disputed whether the Convention rules applied. UPS said that the claimant had agreed that . .
Cited – In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .

Cited by:

Cited – Haralambous, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court at St Albans and Another SC 24-Jan-2018
The appellant challenged by review the use of closed material first in the issue of a search warrant, and subsequently to justify the retention of materials removed during the search.
Held: The appeal failed. No express statutory justification . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Judicial Review

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.598455

Martin v Legal Services Commission: Admn 27 Jul 2007

The claimant challenged by judicial review the discharge of a legal aid certificate in educational negligence proceedings.
Held: A final decision to revoke a legal aid certificate may be challenged by judicial review.

Judges:

Ouseley J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1786 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 15(2), Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (1989 No 339) 77

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Iverson v Iverson 1966
Solicitors and counsel should report to the Legal Aid Board if the cost benefit position in the funded claim deteriorates after the grant of legal aid. . .

Cited by:

Cited – MAK and RK v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Mar-2010
mak_ukECHR10
When RK, a nine year old girl was taken to hospital, with bruises, the paediatrician wrongly suspecting sexual abuse, took blood samples and intimate photographs in the absence of the parents and without their consent.
Held: The doctor had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.258486

Regina v Truro Crown Court ex parte Adair: Admn 12 Feb 1997

Lord Bingham LCJ said: ‘It is clearly established by earlier cases, in particular R v St Albans Crown Court ex parte Cinnamond and R v Croydon Crown Court ex parte Miller, that judicial review did not offer a backdoor means of appeal against the sentences imposed by the Crown Court and appeals from justices. It was nevertheless recognised by those authorities that there came a point at which a penalty was so far outside the reasonable range of penalties as to be indicative of a manifest error of law.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham LCJ

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 135

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McElroy, Regina (on The Application of) v Lewes Combined Court Admn 20-Jun-2014
The claimant sought judicial review of his sentence of six months imprisonment for assault and criminal damage. He submitted that the sentence clearly falls so far outside of the broad area of the court’s discretion that it ought to be quashed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.137080

Regina v Advertising Standards Authority Ltd Ex Parte Vernons Organisation Ltd: QBD 9 Dec 1992

An injunction was not granted to restrain the publication of a decision of the ASA pending the result of a challenge by way of Judicial Review. There is a general principle in our law that the expression of opinion and the conveyance of information will not be restrained by the courts save on pressing grounds. Freedom of expression is as much a sinew of the common law as it is of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Laws J said: ‘If a private individual will not be restrained from expressing his opinion save on pressing grounds I see no reason why a public body having a duty, other things being equal, to express its opinion should be subject to any less rigid rules. It seems to me that the case is, if anything, analogous to one where an administrative body has an adjudicative function and in the course of its duties publishes a ruling criticising some affected person and the ruling is later disturbed or reversed by an appropriate appellate process. There are many such instances and many of them involve the criticism of members of the public, corporate or natural.
I do not know of an instance in which a public body of that kind would fall to be restrained from carrying out what is no more nor less than its ordinary, but important, everyday duties simply upon the grounds that the intended publication contains material which is subject to legal challenge as being vitiated by some error of law. If the application for judicial review here is successful I cannot think but that there are ample means at the applicant’s disposal to correct any adverse impression which what, ex hypothesi, would be an unlawful report may have given to the public. Indeed, though it has not been canvassed in argument, I know of no reason why the fact that they have obtained leave should not itself be disseminated if they wish to take any steps in that direction since this is an attempt to prevent the public and indeed, in fairness to the applicant, its fellow advertisers and others in the trade to which it belongs from seeing that the authority has reached those conclusions. I do not consider that the effects of that publication are damaging to the applicant in a manner which would be so irreparable, so past recall as to amount to a pressing ground, in the language of Strasbourg, a pressing social need, to restrain this public body from carrying out its function in the ordinary way.’

Judges:

Laws J

Citations:

Gazette 09-Dec-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 1289, [1993] 2 All ER 202

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Douglas, Zeta Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited (No 1) CA 21-Dec-2000
The first two claimants sold exclusive rights to photograph their wedding to the third claimant. A paparrazzi infiltrated the wedding and then sold his unauthorised photographs to the defendants, who now appealed injunctions restraining them from . .
Cited – Regina v Advertising Standards Authority Limited ex parte Direct Line Financial Services Limited Admn 8-Aug-1997
An ex parte application was made to quash a decision by the Advertising Standards Authority upholding a complaint that the applicants in that case were in breach of the British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion, and an injunction to prevent . .
Cited – Debt Free Direct Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Advertising Standards Authority Ltd Admn 15-May-2007
The claimant sought continuation of a without notice interim injunction to restrain the defendant from publishing its findings on a complaint against the claimant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.86039

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 that the court had no discretion but to order possession, that the right to appeal review was not a private law right, and the County Court had no jurisdiction in judicial review.
Held: The Council’s appeal was allowed. The right under an introductory tenancy was only to remain into possession until and unless a possession order was made. An introductory tenant could not raise a defence to a claim for possession when that defence was based on the contentions that (a) there had been no breaches of the tenancy agreement (the substantive ground relied on by the Council for bringing the instant proceedings), (b) the relevant Regulations had not been complied with, and (c) there had been a failure to comply with the rules of natural justice in the conduct of the review by the Panel. To hold otherwise would defeat the purpose of the legislation.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Judge, Sir John Knox

Citations:

Times 12-Jan-1999, Gazette 03-Feb-1999, [1998] EWCA Civ 1967, (1999) 31 HLR 810, [1999] 1 WLR 809, [1999] L and TR 190

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 Part V 125(1) 127 128, Housing Act 1996 125(1), Introductory Tenants (Review) Regulations 1997, County Court Act 1984 38(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v Winder HL 1985
Rent demands were made by a local authority landlord on one of its tenants. The local authority, using its powers under the Act, resolved to increase rents generally. The tenant refused to pay the increased element of the rent. He argued that the . .

Cited by:

Cited – North British Housing Association Ltd v Matthews, Same v Others CA 21-Dec-2004
In each case the tenants requested adjournment of the possession proceedings brought against them by the landlord for arrears of rent to allow them time to bring the arrears below the level at which a possession order could be made. In each case it . .
Disapproved in part – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145446

Campaign To Protect Rural England, Kent (CPRE), Regina (on The Application of) v Dover District Council: CA 14 Sep 2016

Appeal against grant of permission to bring judicial review of a planning decision.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and the permission quashed. Laws LJ pointed to three particular factors as calling for clear reasons: the ‘pressing nature’ of the AONB policy as expressed in the NPPF para 115-6 (‘the highest status of protection’); the departure from the officers’ recommendation; and the specific duty imposed by the EIA regulations. Although he noted the relative ‘thinness’ of the material available to the committee on the viability issue, he relied principally on the failure of the committee to assess and explain the degree of harm to the AONB, having regard to the strictness of the policy and the strong view of harm taken by the officers. The only reference to this issue in the minutes spoke of the need to assess whether the advantages ‘outweighed’ the harm to the AONB, wrongly implying that it was simply a question of ‘striking a balance’. Further the reference to ‘minimising the harm’ by ‘effective screening’ took no account of the officers’ view that the change of levels to the east would mean that ‘over time, screening would be largely ineffective’.

Judges:

Laws, Simon LJJ

Citations:

[2016] EWCA Civ 936

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Campaign To Protect Rural England (CPRE), Regina (on The Application of) v Dover District Council Admn 16-Dec-2015
The planning authority granted permission for a substantial development against the advice of its officers. Judicial review was now sought of the process.
Held: The request was refused. . .

Cited by:

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.

Planning, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.569493

Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council: HL 21 Oct 1976

An authority investigating an application for registration of rights of common over land has an implied duty to ‘take reasonable steps to acquaint (itself) with the relevant information.’ A mere factual mistake has become a ground of judicial review, being described as ‘misunderstanding or ignorance of an established and relevant fact’.
The House asked what it was for the Secretary of State to be ‘satisfied’ as to a state of affairs: ‘This form of section is quite well known, and at first sight might seem to exclude judicial review. Sections in this form may, no doubt, exclude judicial review on what is or has become a matter of pure judgment. But I do not think that they go further than that. If a judgment requires, before it can be made, the existence of some facts, then, although the evaluation of those facts is for the Secretary of State alone, the court must inquire whether those facts exist, and have been taken into account, whether the judgment has been made upon a proper self-direction as to those facts, whether the judgment has not been made upon other facts which ought not to have been taken into account.’

Judges:

Lord Wilberforce, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Diplock, Lord Salmon, Lord Russell of Killowen

Citations:

[1977] AC 1014, [1976] UKHL 6, [1976] 3 All ER 665, [1976] 3 WLR 641

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Suffolk County Council Ex Parte Steed and Steed Admn 1995
Judicial review was sought of the Council’s decision to refuse to register a park as a Town or Village Green.
Held: Carnwath J looked at the procedure to be followed by a council receiving an application for registration of commons right: ‘it . .
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 – Office of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited CA 19-Feb-2004
The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties . .
Cited – McDougal, Regina (On the Application of) v Liverpool City Council Admn 22-Jul-2009
Right Questions asked on School Closure
The claimant sought to challenge the respondent’s decision to close a local school. The choice had been made on academic results and the number of vacancies.
Held: The application failed. The Council had complied with its obligation in . .
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 – Save Our Surgery Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts Admn 7-Mar-2013
The claimants sought judicial review of the report prepared by the defendants under which departments providing childrens’ heart surgery at their regional hospital would close. They complained that the consultation had been inadequate and flawed. . .
Cited – Whitston (Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 2-Oct-2014
The claimants challenged the selection by the defendant of victims of meselothemia as a group were excluded from entitlement to the recovery of success fees and insurance premiums paid by successful claimants from unsuccessful defendants.
Cited – Robson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Salford City Council CA 20-Jan-2015
The appellants, all severely disabled appealed against the refusal of their judicial review of the substantial withdrawal by the Council of a service providing them with transport to local day care facilities. They said that the council had failed . .
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.

Land, Judicial Review

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.192097

Armand v Home Secretary: 1943

Citations:

[1943] AC 147

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Aru) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police CA 30-Jan-2004
The applicant had been cautioned by the police. The victim sought judicial review of that decision. The respondent now appealed.
Held: The court of appeal had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal against a judicial review in a criminal matter . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.193379

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment ex parte Shelter: 1997

The court refused to make a costs order against Shelter on the grounds that: (i) there were already pending before the court a sequence of individual cases raising precisely the same issue; (ii) the legal question raised was of genuine public interest; (iii) the applicant’s involvement had assisted the court in determining the issue speedily; and (iv) had the matter been determined in separate proceedings, it was likely that any applicant would have been legally aided, and thus the burden of his/her costs would have fallen upon the tax payer and the respondent would not have obtained an order for his costs.

Judges:

Carnwath J

Citations:

[1997] COD 49

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Judicial Review

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.223262

Regina v University of London; Ex parte Vijayatunga: 1988

The court considered the powers of the Visitors to the University. Simon Brown J said: ‘The Visitor enjoys untrammelled jurisdiction to investigate and correct wrongs done in the administration of the internal law of a Foundation to which he is appointed: a general power to right wrongs and redress grievances and if that on occasions requires the visitor to act akin rather to an Appeal Court than to a Review Court, so be it. Indeed there may well be occasions when he could not properly act other than as an essentially appellate tribunal’.
As to the nature of judicial review, he said: ‘Judicial review is the exercise of the court’s inherent power at common law to determine whether action is lawful or not; in a word to uphold the rule of law’.

Judges:

Simon Brown J

Citations:

[1988] QB 322, [1987] 3 All ER 204, [1988] 2 WLR 106

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cart and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Upper Tribunal and Others Admn 1-Dec-2009
The court was asked whether the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court, exercisable by way of judicial review, extends to such decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) as are not amenable to any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Education

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.442688

G, Regina (on The Application of) v Blackpool Borough Council: Admn 15 Mar 2011

The claimants sought judicial review of decisions and actions taken by the respondents with respect of their son.
Held: Leave was refused because of the repeated delay by the applicants.

Judges:

Langstaff J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1052 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.434862

Regina v Newbury District Council and Newbury and District Agricultural Society ex parte Chieveley Parish Council: CA 23 Jul 1998

Planning authority could not reserve matters where outline approval given under General Development Order. A three year delay between the decision, and the application for judicial review was an undue delay defeating that application. Undue delay provisions applied particularly in planning cases.
Pill LJ observed that ‘a planning permission is contained in a public document which potentially confers benefit on the land to which it relates. Important decisions may be taken by public bodies and private bodies and individuals upon the strength of it, both in relation to the land itself and in the neighbourhood. A chain of events may be set in motion. It is important to good administration that, once granted, a permission should not readily be invalidated’.

Judges:

Pill LJ

Citations:

Times 10-Sep-1998, Gazette 03-Sep-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1279, [1999] PLCR 51, (1998) 10 Admin LR 676, [1998] EG 131

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 31(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Newbury District Council and Newbury and District Agricultural Society ex parte Chieveley Parish Council Admn 23-Jun-1997
Judicial review out of time against planning decision was not allowed because of the need for public administration to proceed. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Adamson and Others v Paddico (267) Ltd SC 5-Feb-2014
Land had been registered as a town or village green but wrongly so. The claimant had sought rectification, but the respondents argued that the long time elapsed after registration should defeat the request.
Held: The appeal were solely as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Judicial Review

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.144758

Re Rooney’s Application: 1995

Citations:

[1995] NI 398

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

Cited – Tweed v Parades Commission for Northern Ireland HL 13-Dec-2006
(Northern Ireland) The applicant sought judicial review of a decision not to disclose documents held by the respondent to him saying that the refusal was disproportionate and infringed his human rights. The respondents said that the documents were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.247415

Regina (Smith, Trevor) v Parole Board: CA 30 Jun 2003

The applicant had been granted leave to present a petition for judicial review, but on certain grounds only. On the hearing, he sought again to present the case including the grounds upon which permission had not been granted.
Held: The judge who heard the substantive application could hear an application based additionally upon grounds rejecetd by the judge giving leave, even if neither the legal nor factual situation had changed, and Opoku should be read accordingly. Each case must be looked at on its own merits. .

Judges:

Woolf LCJ, Auld, Clarke LJJ

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1014, [2003] 1 WLR 2176

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 54.15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Explained – Opoku, Regina (on the Application of) v Principal of Southwark College and Another Admn 17-Oct-2002
The claimant sought permission to add grounds to his application for leave to bring a judicial review.
Held: There was no specific rule excluding a court from granting such a rule. Here however there was no change to support any such . .

Cited by:

Revisited – 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.

Civil Procedure Rules, Judicial Review

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.184485

Regina v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, Ex parte Wachmann: 1992

A local rabbi sought judicial review of the declaration of the Chief Rabbi, following an investigation into allegations of adultery with members of his congregation, that he was religiously and morally unfit to occupy his position.
Held: Simon Brown J said: ‘Mr Beloff invites my attention to certain passages in the judgments of the Court of Appeal both in Law’s case and in the Datafin Case [1987] Q.B. 815. I need not recite them. Their effect is clear enough. To say of decisions of a given body that they are public law decisions with public law consequences means something more than that they are decisions which may be of great interest or concern to the public or, indeed, which may have consequences for the public. To attract the court’s supervisory jurisdiction there must be not merely a public but potentially a governmental interest in the decision-making power in question. And, indeed, generally speaking the exercise of the power in question involves not merely the voluntary regulations of some important area of public life but also what Mr Beloff calls a ‘twin track system of control.’ In other words, where non-governmental bodies have hitherto been held reviewable, they have generally been operating as an integral part of a regulatory system which, although it is itself non-statutory, is nevertheless supported by statutory powers and penalties clearly indicative of government concern.’
. . And ‘As Mr Beloff points out, the court would never be prepared to rule on questions of Jewish law. Mr Carus, recognising this prospective difficulty, says that in advancing his challenge here, the applicant would be prepared to rely solely upon the common law concept of natural justice. But it would not always be easy to separate out procedural complaints from consideration of substantive principles of Jewish law which may underlie them . . That consideration apart, this court is hardly in a position to regulate what is essentially a religious function – the determination whether someone is morally and religiously fit to carry out the spiritual and pastoral duties of his office. The Court must inevitably be wary of entering so self-evidently sensitive an area, straying across the well-recognised divide between church and state. One cannot, therefore, escape the conclusion that if judicial review lies here, then one way or another this secular court must inevitably be drawn into adjudicating upon matters intimate to a religious community’.
The state has not surrendered or delegated any of its functions or powers to the Church. None of the functions that the Church of England performs would have to be performed in its place by the state if the Church were to abdicate its responsibility. The relationship which the state has with the Church of England is one of recognition, not of the devolution to it of any of the powers or functions of government. ‘the court would never be prepared to rule on questions of Jewish law’ In relation to the determination of whether someone is morally and religiously fit to carry out the spiritual and pastoral duties of his office, the court ‘must inevitably be wary of entering so self-evidently sensitive an area, straying across the well-recognised divide between church and state’

Judges:

Simon Brown J

Citations:

[1992] 1 WLR 1036

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 (Amicus etc) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Admn 26-Apr-2004
The claimants sought a declaration that part of the Regulations were invalid, and an infringement of their human rights. The Regulations sought to exempt church schools from an obligation not to discriminate against homosexual teachers.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Sualiman Ali CA 12-May-1993
The court had been asked to intervene in an internal dispute as to the role of an Imam in a mosque community.
Held: The request was denied. The case was not one of public law: ‘ the particular function which the Imam was performing affected . .
Cited – Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 31-Jul-2003
The claimant, a former Anglican priest, sued in defamation. The defendant argued that the claim was non-justiciable since it would require the court to adjudicate on matters of faith and religious doctrine.
Held: The claim could not be heard. . .
Cited – Khaira and Others v Shergill and Others CA 17-Jul-2012
The parties disputed the trusteeship and governance of two Gurdwaras (Sikh temples). The defendants now applied for the claim to be struck out on the basis that the differences were as to Sikh doctrines and practice and as such were unjusticiable. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Ecclesiastical, Constitutional, Judicial Review

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.184046

Regina v Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council Ex Parte Kirkham: CA 5 May 1998

When an application had been made for planning permission for a waste incinerator, a neighbour had a sufficient interest to apply for a judicial review, but the Local Authority was right to pay heed to the Best Practicable Environmental Option requirement.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jul-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 772

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal From – Regina v Bolton Metropolitan Council ex parte Roger Arthur Kirkhan Admn 19-Dec-1997
. .

Cited by:

Appeal To – Regina v Bolton Metropolitan Council ex parte Roger Arthur Kirkhan Admn 19-Dec-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Judicial Review

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.144250

Regina v Northumbria Police ex parte Brown: CA 8 Apr 1998

The applicant renewed his application for a judicial review of decisions by the respondent as to his treatment. He had been a police informer, but then moved to Devon for his protection. He became indigent.
Held: The order sought would be quite outside the power of the court. Leave refused.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 670

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Judicial Review

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.144148

Farrell, Regina (on The Application of) v Investigating Committee of The Architects Registration Board: Admn 17 Jan 2013

‘The question which arises in this case is this: where the court has disposed of a judicial review application refusing permission, but directing that the parties make written representations on costs, and subsequently makes an order for costs, is there a right to the disappointed party to apply to the court to set aside or vary the order for costs which has been made? ‘

Judges:

Seys Llewellyn QC

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1000 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472968

Toth and Another, Regina (On The Application of) v General Medical Council: Admn 23 Jun 2000

Lightman J said: ‘The general principle is well established that, if an applicant establishes in judicial review proceedings that the decision which he challenges is bad in law, he should be granted relief, and most particularly an order quashing that decision, unless there are strong reasons in public policy for refusing relief or unless to quash the decision would occasion so great an injustice either to the respondent or to a third party as to require some other course to be taken.’

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

[2000] 1 WLR 2209, [2000] EWHC Admin 361

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Judicial Review

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.472246

Low and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 21 Jan 2009

In each case the applicant, a company based in Ireland had employed in its restaurants, Chinese nationals who were unlawfully present here. The company sought judicial review of the arrest of its employees.
Held: ‘None of the claimants had any entitlement to rely on Article 49 and the posted workers cases because the third party nationals are not resident in Ireland. The UK, in any event, would be justified under EC law in taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party nationals are legally employed and lawfully resident in the member state of establishment. As the third country nationals are not lawfully resident in the Republic of Ireland, the defendant’s decisions not to regularise their status and to detain and remove them were proportionate and were not in breach of EC law.’

Judges:

Pearl David J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 35 (Admin), [2009] 2 CMLR 22

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Treaty 49, Directive 96/71/EC: Posted Workers Directive

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Commission v Germany (Freedom To Provide Services) ECJ 19-Jan-2006
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations -? Article 49 EC -? Freedom to provide services -? Undertaking employing workers who are nationals of non-?member States -? Undertaking providing services in . .
Cited – Regina (Vetterlein) v Hampshire County Council Admn 2001
The claimants challenged a planning permission granted to a waste disposal site, saying that it violated their article 8 rights.
Held: The court asked whether there was reasonable and convincing evidence that the claimants quality of life . .
Cited – Raymond Vander Elst v Office des Migrations Internationales ECJ 1994
A Belgian service provider brought its Moroccan workers to France in order to carry out a demolition contract. The workers had been ‘lawfully and habitually employed’ in Belgium and they intended to return to Belgium after completion of the project. . .
Cited – Rush Portuguesa Ld v Office National d’immigration ECJ 27-Mar-1990
ECJ Articles 59 and 60 of the EEC Treaty and Articles 215 and 216 of the Act of Accession of Portugal must be interpreted as meaning that an undertaking established in Portugal providing services in the . .
Cited – Commission v Luxembourg C-445/03 ECJ 21-Oct-2004
ECJ Failure of a State to fulfil obligations – Freedom to provide services – Requirements imposed by the host Member State on undertakings which deploy within its territory salaried workers who are nationals of . .
Cited – Commission v Austria (Freedom To Provide Services) ECJ 21-Sep-2006
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 49 EC – Freedom to provide services – Undertaking employing workers who are not nationals of a Member State- Undertaking providing services in . .
Cited – Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 11-Jul-2002
The applicant had come to England on a six month visitor’s visa. She then married an English national, but her visa was not extended.
Held: The husband had business interests and activities throughout the community. The deportation of the . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of Loutchansky and Others) v The First Secretary of State 2005
The court considered the right of a worker claiming a community right to work here: ‘the underlying principle is that, in order to render a community right effective, it may be necessary to recognise a derivative right in a non-national who has no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Judicial Review, European

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.280071

Council for Licensed Conveyancers v Mooney and Another; Mooney v Council for Licensed Conveyancers and Viney: CA 18 Dec 1997

The respondent’s practice had suffered intervention by the Council. He complained that they had not followed the required procedure.
Held: The notices were lawful. The issues were ones of public law, and the respondent was required to frame his claim by way of judicial review, and to use an ordinary action would be an abuse of process. This was not a case in which the public law element was incidental.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 3038

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1985 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex parte Rossminster Ltd HL 13-Dec-1979
The House considered the power of an officer of the Board of Inland Revenue to seize and remove materials found on premises which a warrant obtained on application to the Common Serjeant authorised him to enter and search; but where the source of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Judicial Review

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143437

Regina v Bassetlaw District Council, Ex parte Oxby: CA 11 Dec 1997

Hobhouse LJ stated that ‘if it has been clearly established . . that a planning consent was improperly and invalidly granted, then it should, in principle, be declared to be void’.

Judges:

Hobhouse LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2960, [1998] PLCR 283

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Bassetlaw District Council ex parte Oxby Admn 11-Dec-1996
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Adamson and Others v Paddico (267) Ltd SC 5-Feb-2014
Land had been registered as a town or village green but wrongly so. The claimant had sought rectification, but the respondents argued that the long time elapsed after registration should defeat the request.
Held: The appeal were solely as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Planning

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143359

Sargeant, Regina (on The Application of) v First Minister of Wales and Another: Admn 27 Mar 2019

The claimant sought to challenge the announcement by the First Minister of an independent inquiry into his dismissal of a member of his cabinet, the claimant’s husband, who then went on to commit suicide. The claimant said that the First Minster had in fact sought to set the operational protocol for the inquiry.
Held: The claim was allowed. The publicity surrounding the launch created a legitimate expectation that the inquiry would be independent of the First Minister. The Permanent Secretary had been given an unpublished remit which conflicted with the publicly declared terms for the inquiry.

Judges:

Haddon-Cave LJ, Swift J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 739 (Admin), [2019] WLR(D) 187, [2019] 4 WLR 64

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD

Statutes:

Government of Wales Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Constitutional, Judicial Review

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.635266

Redcar and Cleveland Independent Providers Association and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council: Admn 17 Jan 2013

The claimants challenged the setting of rates for payments to care homes for patients. The Council denied that such a decision was subject to judicial review.
Held: It was so amenable.

Judges:

Gosnell HHJ

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 4 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 44, [2013] PTSR 1096

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470364

Asha Foundation, Regina (on the Application of) v The Millennium Commission: Admn 14 May 2002

The appellant challenged the decision of the Commission not to award a grant, and alleged that the failure to give reasons for its decision vitiated that decision.
Held: The commission was not adjudicating on a question of fact, but making a complex assessment of competing interests. That decision was an exercise of a subjective judgement, and as such was not properly susceptible to judicial review. The commission need not give a detailed explanation of its reason, but need only state the main reason.

Citations:

Times 06-Jun-2002, Gazette 06-Jun-2002, Gazette 20-Jun-2002, [2002] EWHC 916 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Lottery etc Act 1991 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina (Asha Foundation) v Millenium Commission CA 16-Jan-2003
The applicant had applied for funding to the Millennium Commission. It now appealed a refusal to order the respondent to give full reasons for its decision.
Held: The applicant requested what it called meaningful reasons. The importance of . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (Asha Foundation) v Millenium Commission CA 16-Jan-2003
The applicant had applied for funding to the Millennium Commission. It now appealed a refusal to order the respondent to give full reasons for its decision.
Held: The applicant requested what it called meaningful reasons. The importance of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Judicial Review

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.172255

Regina v Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Ex Parte Al-Fayed: CA 5 Nov 1997

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards had published a report relating to a complaint by the applicant against a Member of Parliament.
Held: The applicant sought permission to challenge this by judicial review. The applicant’s appeal failed. No judicial review was possible of the workings of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards despite the absence of any Appeal from his findings. To allow a judicial review would be to impugn the House of Commons. Lord Woolf MR said: ‘Activities of government are the basic fare of judicial review. Activities of Parliament are not the basic fare of judicial review. Indeed activities of Parliament are accepted in general by Mr. Pannick to be not subject to judicial review. If I may put it this way, if what was being sought here was judicial review of the Standing Committee responsible for supervising the activities of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Mr. Pannick would accept that judicial review was not available.’ and ‘The focus of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is on the propriety of the workings and the activities of those engaged within Parliament. He is one of the means by which the select committee set up by the House carries out its functions, which are accepted to be part of the proceedings of the House. This being the role of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, it would be inappropriate for this court to use its supervisory powers to control what the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards does in relation to an investigation of this sort. The responsibility for supervising the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is placed by Parliament, through its standing orders, on the Committee of Standards and Privileges of the House, and it is for that body to perform that role and not the courts.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR

Citations:

Gazette 05-Nov-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2488, [1998] 1 WLR 669, [1998] 1 All ER 93

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton v Al Fayed HL 23-Mar-2000
The claimant MP sued the defendant in defamation after he had alleged that the MP had corruptly solicited and received payments and benefits in kind as a reward for parliamentary services rendered.
Held: Parliament has protected by privilege . .
Cited – Chaytor and Others, Regina v CACD 30-Jul-2010
The defendants had been members of the Houses of Commons and of Lords. They faced charges of dishonesty in respect of their expenses claims. They now appealed a finding that they were not subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament under . .
Cited – Chaytor and Others, Regina v SC 1-Dec-2010
The defendants faced trial on charges of false accounting in connection in different ways with their expenses claims whilst serving as members of the House of Commons. They appealed against rejection of their assertion that the court had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Constitutional

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.87524

Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Quintavelle (PPC for the Prolife Alliance): CA 20 Oct 1997

The applicant stood for Parliament, but the respondent had refused to show his party election broadcast on the grounds of its lack of taste and decency. He had sought to demonstrate the evils of abortion, and now renewed his application for leave to bring judicial review of the decision.
Held: It was not arguable that the respondent’s decision was perverse, and the election having passed, no further virtue was to be served by conducting a full review. Each such decision would be on its own merits.

Judges:

The Master of The Rolls, Lord Woolf, Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Chadwick

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2531, (1998) 10 Admin LR 425

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-Life Alliance Party Admn 24-Mar-1997
The complainant sought leave to present a judicial review of the respondent’s refusal to transmit his party election broadcast on the grounds of its absence of taste and decency.
Held: The decision that the offending parts of the transmission . .

Cited by:

Cited – Willers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Elections, Media, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142929

Rye, Henson and J B Trustees Limited Trustees of Dennis Rye Pension Fund v Sheffield City Council and Frederick Henson and Rye (the Trustees of the Dennis Rye 1992 Grandchildren Settlement Fund) v Sheffield City Council: CA 31 Jul 1997

Courts must not get tied up in public law/private law judicial review or other arguments when remedies and results provided by both jurisdictions are similar. The guidelines set down involved: ‘not only considering the technical questions of the distinctions between public and private rights and bodies but also looking at the practical consequences of the choice of procedure which has been made. If the choice has no significant disadvantage for the parties, the public or the court, then it should not normally be regarded as constituting an abuse.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf

Citations:

Times 20-Aug-1997, [1997] 4 All ER 747, [1997] EWCA Civ 2257, [1998] 1 WLR 840

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food ex parte Lower Burytown Farms Limited and National Farmers Union and others Admn 1-Aug-1995
The applicants were farmers who had claimed payments under the set-aside scheme. Payment was refused on the basis that they had claimed too much, but payment was ordered to be made after a ruling in Europe. They now sought judicial review of a . .
Cited – Steed v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 26-May-2000
The claimant surrendered guns and ammunition under the 1997 Act, and was due to be compensated. His claim was not settled, and he commenced an action in the County Court for the sums claimed. The defendant denied any duty to pay up within a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142654

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Harrison: CA 16 Jul 1997

In judicial review the court is not required to consider the route by which the impugned decision is reached, but only the terminus.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2122, [1997] JR 113

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Tweed v Parades Commission for Northern Ireland HL 13-Dec-2006
(Northern Ireland) The applicant sought judicial review of a decision not to disclose documents held by the respondent to him saying that the refusal was disproportionate and infringed his human rights. The respondents said that the documents were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.142519

Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia: CA 7 Mar 1997

The applicant had been found to have deliberately procured her own eviction from her tenanted accommodation in Harrow. She was given temporary accommodation in a guest house, where she stayed for over a year. Her housing benefit was then reduced by half, on the basis that her rent was too high. The landlord then told her that she would be evicted. The authority now appealed against a judgment that she was not voluntarily homess.
Held: The decision was affirmed. Roch LJ, with whose judgment Aldous and Leggatt LJJ agreed, stated at pp 980-981 his agreement with the judge that the causal connection could be broken by events other than the acquisition of a ‘settled residence’, and that Bassett’s case was an example of such a situation.

Judges:

Roch, Aldous, Leggatt LJJ

Citations:

(1997) 29 HLR 974, [1997] EWCA Civ 1191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v London Borough of Harrow ex parte Fahia 1996
After deliberately losing her tenancy, the authority had provided the appliant with temporary accomodation in a guest house, but after her housing benefits were halved she lost that accomodation also.
Held: The authority had a duty to house . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Harrow London Borough Council Ex Parte Fahia HL 16-Sep-1998
The local authority submitted first that a person making a second application for emergency housing had to demonstrate a change of circumstance which might lead to a second application being successful and second that it was for the local authority . .
Cited – Haile v London Borough of Waltham Forest SC 20-May-2015
‘The question in this case is whether the appellant falls within the scope of section 193 of the Housing Act 1996 as amended, which applies, by virtue of subsection (1), where the local housing authority are satisfied that ‘an applicant is homeless, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Housing

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141587

Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 25 Jul 2012

The claimant sought in advance permission to cross examine two civil servants at a forthcoming judicial review. Documents had been leaked and widely published suggesting that the decision now to be challenged had been taken for improper purposes.
Held: It was an exceptional case, and the civil servants should be made available for cross-examination.

Judges:

Stanley Burnton LJ

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2115 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Bancoult Admn 3-Mar-1999
Application for leave to appeal granted. . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Another, ex parte Bancoult Admn 3-Nov-2000
The applicant sought judicial review of an ordinance made by the commissioner for the British Indian Ocean Territory. An issue was raised whether the High Court in London had jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings and grant relief.
Held: . .
See Also – Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) Admn 11-May-2006
The claimant on behalf of himself and other islanders sought a declaration that the 2004 Order was unlawful. The islands had been emptied of people in 1973 and before in order to allow use of the islands as military bases. He had enjoyed a right to . .
See Also – Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) CA 23-May-2007
The claimant was a Chagos Islander removed in 1970 to make way for a US airbase. The court had ordered that the islanders be allowed to return, but the appellant had passed an Order in Council effectively reversing the position, and now appealed a . .
See Also – Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) HL 22-Oct-2008
The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had . .

Cited by:

Directions – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 21-Nov-2012
Reasons for decision allowing re-amendment of claim and requiring production of documents by a non-party. . .
Directions – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 11-Jun-2013
The claimant, displaced from the Chagos Archipelago, challenged a decision by the respondent to create a no-take Marine Protected Area arround the island which would make life there impossible if he and others returned. The respondent renewed his . .
See Also – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 23-May-2014
The appellant wished to challenge the decision made by the respondent to declare a ‘no-take’ Marine Protected Area’ covering their former home islands of Chagos. They sought to have entered in evidence of an improper motive in the Minister making . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463154

I-CD Publishing Ltd v The Secretary of State, The Information Commissioner (Interested Party): Admn 21 Jul 2003

The claimant sought judicial review challenging the restrictions on the sale of electoral registers to registered credit reference agencies. Following Robertson (1) the new regulations created two registers, and the claimant sought to be able to purchase the records for its register of addresses.
Held: The consultation had been adequate. The regulations did not create a duopoly, and any new registrant as a credit reference agency could also apply for access to the registers. The regulations were neutral as to the number of registrants. There was no exceptional case here deserving declaratory relief. The company had also delayed bringing its action to such an extent as to deprive it of the right to a judicial review, and nor was there any justification for declaratory relief.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1761 (Admin), Times 11-Aug-2003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Reid, Robertson v City of Wakefield Metropolitan Council, Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 16-Nov-2001
The claimant requested the defendant authority to remove his details from the electoral register before it was sold on to third parties. They refused. He claimed that the information had been obtained from him under penalty of criminal charges, and . .
Cited – Robertson, Regina (on the Application of) v Experian Ltd and Another (2) Admn 21-Jul-2003
The claimant sought a judicial review of the regulations allowing sale of the electoral role by local government bodies to registered credit reference agencies. An adjournment was refused, and the case proceeded in his absence.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – Pyx Granite Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government HL 1959
There is a strong presumption that Parliament will not legislate to prevent individuals affected by legal measures promulgated by executive public bodies having a fair opportunity to challenge these measures and to vindicate their rights in court . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v Attorney-General HL 1980
The applicant sought a declaration as to the lawfulness of a lottery scheme whilst criminal proceedings were pending against it for the same scheme.
Held: It was not necessary to decide whether a declaration as to the criminality or otherwise . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Able and Others QBD 28-Apr-1983
The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing . .
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.

Elections, Judicial Review

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.184880

Parveen, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Redbridge: CA 12 Mar 2020

Appeal against an order made in the Administrative Court that each party should bear its own costs following the appellant’s withdrawal of a claim for judicial review.

Judges:

Lord Justice Males

Citations:

[2020] EWCA Civ 194

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.648856

Regina v Broadcasting Complaints Commission Ex Parte Granada Television Ltd: CA 16 Dec 1994

The Broadasting Complaints Commission had been established to determine questions of privacy, and the courts should be slow to intervene. The right of privacy of an individual had not been lost by past publicity. That privacy had been infringed by the broadcast complained of, and the commissions decision was not unreasonable. The privacy of bereaved families was infringed by photographs even if the family was otherwise notorious.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Feb-1995, Ind Summary 20-Feb-1995, Times 16-Dec-1994, [1995] EMLR 16

Statutes:

Broadcasting Act 1990 143

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Broadcasting Complaints Commission, ex Parte Granada Television Ltd QBD 31-May-1993
The Commission had not been unreasonable in taking the view that a broadcast had infringed the privacy of the subject of the complaint. Judicial Review was not available against BBC for infringement of privacy. . .

Cited by:

Cited – McKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
Cited – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (1) QBD 16-May-2011
A leading footballer had obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing his identity and allegations of sexual misconduct. The claimant said that she had demanded money not to go public.
Held: It had not been suggested that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Media, Judicial Review, Information

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.86221

Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Furneaux: CA 1994

The court is entitled to refuse a request for judicial review on the sole ground of delay without any requirement of a causal link between the delay and any prejudice. Mere tardiness or incompetence of legal or other advisors is normally not a good ground for the grant of leave to bring a case out of time, the remedy of the client being to sue those advisors. A satisfactory explanation may however be available. The court retained a discretion under s 31(6) of the 1981 Act to refuse, on the grounds of undue delay, leave to make the application or the relief sought if it considered that the grant of relief would substantially prejudice the rights of another person.

Citations:

[1994] 2 All ER 652, (1993) 17 BMLR 49

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 31(6)

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.

Judicial Review

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.465883

Regina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Sualiman Ali: CA 12 May 1993

The court had been asked to intervene in an internal dispute as to the role of an Imam in a mosque community.
Held: The request was denied. The case was not one of public law: ‘ the particular function which the Imam was performing affected the applicant’s rights in a way which was peculiar to a limited class of persons, namely, persons who were members of the Bury Park Mosque Community’. However, as to the suggestion that the dispute was in essence one of religious doctrine: ‘The sole source of the power of the Mosque’s constitution, in the eyes of English law, is the consensual submission of the members of the Mosque community to its provisions. Likewise, the decision making authority of the Imam derived from the private law of contract, albeit by way of an order of the Chancery Court, the proceedings before the Chancery Court being based on alleged breaches of the constitution by the defendants to that action, that is to say by the existing executive committee.’

Judges:

Balcombe, McCowan, Roch LJJ

Citations:

Times 15-May-1993, Independent 13-Sep-1993, [1993] EWCA Civ 36, [1994] COD 142

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, Ex parte Wachmann 1992
A local rabbi sought judicial review of the declaration of the Chief Rabbi, following an investigation into allegations of adultery with members of his congregation, that he was religiously and morally unfit to occupy his position.
Held: Simon . .
Appeal from – Regina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Suliman Ali ChD 30-Aug-1951
Application was made for judicial review of a decision as to the governance of a Mosque.
Held: The application was not justiciable, in that the role played by the Imam did not contain an element of public law so as to attract the supervisory . .
Cited – Lee v Showmens Guild of Great Britain CA 1952
Decisions of inferior tribunals, including arbitrators, were reviewable on the basis of general error of law on record for which certiorari might issue. A decision may be reviewable where there was no evidence supporting particular conclusions.
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 . .
Upheld – Regina v the Imam of Bury Park Jame Masjid Luton and others ex parte Suliman Ali QBD 13-Sep-1991
The court was asked to intervene in an internal dispute as to the role of an Imam in a mosque community.
Held: . .

Cited by:

Cited – Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 31-Jul-2003
The claimant, a former Anglican priest, sued in defamation. The defendant argued that the claim was non-justiciable since it would require the court to adjudicate on matters of faith and religious doctrine.
Held: The claim could not be heard. . .
Cited – Khaira and Others v Shergill and Others CA 17-Jul-2012
The parties disputed the trusteeship and governance of two Gurdwaras (Sikh temples). The defendants now applied for the claim to be struck out on the basis that the differences were as to Sikh doctrines and practice and as such were unjusticiable. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Ecclesiastical, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.428702

Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Ferrero Ltd: CA 1993

The case concerned the prohibition in respect of chocolate eggs containing plastic toys one of which had been swallowed by and choked to death a small boy, and a power in the interests of public safety to prohibit the sale of particular goods, which carried a right of appeal to a Magistrates’ Court.
Held: Where there is an alternative remedy and especially where Parliament has provided a statutory appeal procedure it is only exceptionally that judicial review should be granted. It is therefore necessary, where the exception is invoked to look carefully at the suitability of the statutory appeal in the context of the particular case. ‘There are very strong dicta, both in this Court and in the House of Lords as cited, emphasising that where there is an alternative remedy and especially where Parliament has provided a statutory appeal procedure it is only exceptionally that judicial review should be granted’.
As to the suggested duty to consult, Talyor LJ said that if the supposed duty were to depend upon the facts and urgency of each case, enforcement authorities would be faced with a serious dilemma.

Judges:

Lord Justice Taylor

Citations:

[1993] 1 All ER 530

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v District Court Martial Sitting at RAF Lyneham (ex parte SAC Wayne Robert James Stoodley) Admn 20-May-1998
The defendant sought certiorari of a refusal of an adjournment of his hearing by the respondent. His defence team had requested an adjournment for a psychiatric report. The court had said such a report would not go as to mens rea.
Held: The . .
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 . .
Cited – Vella v London Borough of Lambeth Admn 14-Nov-2005
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision to serve an abatement notice in respect of premises where the normal noise incidents of living were heard in neighbouring flats, which notices were to be abated by noise insulation.
Held: The . .
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.

Judicial Review

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.179890

Regina v Chesterfield Borough Council Ex Parte Fullwood: CA 15 Jun 1993

A non-dependant joint occupier can be taken into account when a claimant applies for housing benefit, even though they were not themselves liable for the rent.

Citations:

Ind Summary 05-Jul-1993, Times 15-Jun-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Judicial Review

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86347

In Re E (No 2): CA 11 Aug 1994

The claimant was subject to a cvil proceedings order, requiring to obtain leave before issuing proceedings. He now sought to appeal a finding against him that he should have sought such permission before applying for permission to issue judicial review proceedings.
Held: The Court of Appeal may not hear an appeal from a refusal of leave to a vexatious litigant to issue proceedings. Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘The proper way to deal with the matter, in my judgment, is that, upon an application being made by someone to whom section 42 applies for leave to apply for the judicial review of the decision, the matter should be placed before one of the judges who habitually deal with applications for leave under Ord. 53 r. 3 and that he should consider the matter on the footing that he is faced with an application under the section 42 order and an application under Order 53. If he decides that there is a case for giving leave under Order 53, he will of course have no difficulty in deciding that it is a case in which he should also give leave under the section 42 order, and he should give both leaves. If he decides that there is no case for giving leave under Order 53 he equally will have no difficulty in refusing leave under the section 42 order.
It is at the next stage that things will be different according to whether or not he has given leave under the section 42 order. If he refuses leave under the section 42 order, that is the end of the matter, because there is no right of appeal . . If he gives leave, the respondent will be unable to attack the leave under section 42 because that is final, but he may be able to attack the leave under Order 53. At that stage the vexatious litigant, having obtained his leave under section 42, will be treated in all respects as if he were not subject to the order.’
There is generally no appeal against a refusal of leave to commence proceedings to somebody deemed a vexatious litigant.

Judges:

Lord Donaldson MR

Citations:

Times 11-Aug-1994, Ind Summary 15-Aug-1994

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 42

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81871

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Balbo B and C Auto Transporti Internazionali: Admn 22 Mar 2001

Where a notice of liability was served on a transport operator with regard to his responsibility for transporting illegal immigrants into the country, and he wished to challenge it, the proper approach was to allow the notice to expire, and then to defend any proceedings brought. Given that way of dealing with it, it was not appropriate to challenge the notice itself by way of judicial review. The form of notice issued after review did not refer to the Secretary of State’s need to pursue his remedy through the courts. This was unfortunate, but if it were true, it would make him judge and jury in his own cause.

Citations:

Gazette 11-May-2001, Times 22-Mar-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 195, [2001] 1 WLR 1556

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Immigration, Transport

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88650

Regina v Taylor and Another: CACD 15 Jun 1993

In June 1991 Mrs Shaughnessy was stabbed to death at home. In July 1992 the Taylor sisters were convicted of that murder. An investigating police officer had suppressed an inconsistent statement made by a highly material witness, and there was also complaint about press coverage during the trial.
Held: The reporting was ‘unremitting, extensive, sensational, inaccurate and misleading’. Though the judge had given appropriate warnings to the jury, it was impossible to say that the jury had not been influenced. A fair trial was no longer possible, and the appeal succeeded, with no re-trial being possible either.

Citations:

Times 15-Jun-1993, Independent 15-Jun-1993, (1994) 98 Cr App R 361

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Cited – Regina v Stone CACD 14-Feb-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction in 1998 of murder based on a confession said to have been made to a fellow prisoner on remand. A witness supporting that confession said after the trial that he had lied under police pressure. The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88157

Regina (A) v Partnerships in Care Ltd: QBD 11 Apr 2002

The owners of private mental hospital sought to change the character of one of its wards. A patient sought leave to challenge that change by judicial review, arguing that the hospital served a public function.
Held: Although the contracting out of the Heath Authority’s functions might not always transfer its public obligations, such obligations might fall on a body such as the respondent in other ways. Here the Regulation imposed a direct statutory duty to provide adequate staff and treatment facilities, and the private hospital was the subject of specific statutory duties which underpinned its activities. The patients had been admitted by compulsion. The hospital exercised a public function in their care, and decisions about that care were susceptible to review.

Judges:

Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

Times 23-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 529 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 2610

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Nursing Homes and Mental Nursing Homes Regulations 1984 (SI 1984 No 1578) 12(1), Registered Homes Act 1984, Mental Health Act 1983 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Scott v LGBT Foundation Ltd QBD 3-Mar-2020
Disclosure of risk of self harm made no claim
The claimant complained that the respondent support group had disclosed to his doctor that fact that they had assessed him as being at significant risk of suicide or other substantial self-harm, and that it was at that time unable to provide Mr . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 24 October 2022; Ref: scu.170069

Regina on the Application of Tagoe-Thompson v the Hospital Managers of the Park Royal Centre: CA 12 Mar 2003

The applicant, detained under the section by the respondent, appealed refusal of a judicial review and a writ of habeas corpus. He had applied for a review of his detention. The review had been heard by a panel of three. Two judged in his favour.
Held: The Act required a minimum of three votes in his favour. The power to order his release was only exerciseable by three doctors reaching agreement.

Judges:

The Hon Mrs Justice Arden Dbe Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Pill

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 330, Times 18-Apr-2003, [2003] 1 WLR 1272

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Grindley v Barker 1798
Where a number of persons are entrusted with powers not of mere private confidence, but in some respect of a general nature, and all of them are regularly assembled, the majority will conclude the minority, and their act will be the act of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Health

Updated: 23 October 2022; Ref: scu.179744

Chambers v British Olympic Association: QBD 18 Jul 2008

The claimant, a former Olypmic sprinter had now competed a ban after being found to have taken banned drugs. He had returned to the sprort but now challenged the policy of the respondent not to allow for consideration of the Olympic team, athletes who had completed a drugs ban save in special circumstances. He now applied for relief.

Judges:

Mackay J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2028 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Zockoll Group Limited v Mercury Communications Limited CA 8-Jul-1997
. .
Cited – Meca-Medina And Majcen v Commission (Competition) ECJ 18-Jul-2006
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Rules adopted by the International Olympic Committee concerning doping control – Incompatibility with the Community rules on competition and freedom to provide services – Complaint – . .
Cited – Modahl v British Athletic Federation Limited CA 28-Jul-1997
Lord Woolf MR said: ‘The question of whether a complaint about the conduct of a disciplinary committee gives rise to a remedy in public law or private law or is often difficult to determine. However the complaint in both cases would be based on an . .
Cited – McInnes v Onslow-Fane ChD 1978
The applicant had been granted a boxing manager’s licence for several years. He appealed its refusal now over a few years.
Held: The case was in the application for a licence rather than in a forfeiture or an expectation class, and there was . .
Applied – Bradley v Jockey Club QBD 2004
The former jockey sought an injunction to restrain the respondent enforcing a ban it had imposed on him from working as a jockey for five years. The defendant had previously been ruled authoritatively not to be amenable to judicial review in public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.277898

M v London Borough of Croydon: CA 8 May 2012

The court considered the proper approach to the award of costs in judicial review proceedings.
Held: The position should be no different for litigation in the Administrative Court from what it is in general civil litigation.

Judges:

Neuberger MR, Hallett VP, Stanley Burnton LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 595

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re T (Children) SC 25-Jul-2012
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.456512

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.

Citations:

[1993] 1 Lloyds Rep 176

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.180993

The Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson: CA 18 Dec 2002

The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: The applicant’s human rights were engaged by the decision. When looking at whether judicial review was a sufficient remedy, the court must look to the statutory context. The first recommendation by the panel lacked the necessary independence, but that decision was not rendered valueless. The availability of judicial review would very likely cure any defect in the initial decision in the absence of some special feature. Laws LJ said that there is some danger of undermining legal certainty by excessive debates over how many angels can stand on the head of the article 6 pin.
Laws LJ said: ‘The basis of judicial review rests in the free-standing principle that every action of a public body must be justified by law, and at common law the High Court is the arbiter of all claimed justifications.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Waller, The President

Citations:

Times 02-Jan-2003, Gazette 13-Mar-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1812

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6, National Assistance (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 2977) 25, Local Authority Social Services (Complaints Procedure) Order 1990 (1990 No 2244) 7B(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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 . .
Cited – London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum CA 6-Mar-2002
The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions . .
Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of the Personal Representatives of Christopher Beeson) v Dorset County Council and Another QBD 30-Nov-2001
The Council had provided financial assistance for the care of the claimant’s father before his death in a residential home. Those costs were in part recoverable as a civil debt. His father had given him the house by deed of gift. The regulations . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina (on the Application of the Personal Representatives of Christopher Beeson) v Dorset County Council and Another QBD 30-Nov-2001
The Council had provided financial assistance for the care of the claimant’s father before his death in a residential home. Those costs were in part recoverable as a civil debt. His father had given him the house by deed of gift. The regulations . .
Cited – Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening) HL 13-Feb-2003
The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an . .
Cited – Feld, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster v London Borough of Barnet, Lord Mayor and Citizens of the City of Westminster CA 18-Oct-2004
The applicants sought housing as homeless people. After the refusal of their applications, they sought a review, and in due course a second review. That second review was conducted by the same officer who had conducted the first. The appellant . .
Cited – Tomlinson and Others v Birmingham City Council SC 17-Feb-2010
The appellant asked whether the statutory review of a housing authority’s decision on whether he was intentionally homeless was a determination of a civil right, and if so whether the review was of the appropriate standard. The claimant said that . .
Cited – Michalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Human Rights, Judicial Review

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.178524

Regina v Knightsbridge Crown Court, ex parte Johnson: QBD 1986

J appealed from the magistrates court against his conviction. Due to a mix up at his solicitors, he was not informed of the hearing, and, on his non-attendance at the Crown Court, it refused an adjournment and decided the appeal against him. He now sought judicial review of that decision.
Held: Review was granted, the decision set aside and the case remitted to be decided on its merits. It would have been proper to grant an adjournment.

Citations:

[1986] Crim LR 803

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Considered – Regina v Diggines, ex parte Rahmani CA 1985
R, had failed to attend the hearing of her appeal from a refusal to extend her stay in the UK. Her advisers had failed to note her new address and had been unable to notify her of the hearing. The appeal was dismissed in her absence. The adjudicator . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.646073

Al-Mehdawi v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 23 Nov 1989

The applicant, a student had overstayed his leave. Through his solicitor’s negligence, he lost his appeal against deportation. He sought judicial review of that decision.
Held: Judgment obtained in a party’s absence due entirely to the fault of that party or his advisor was not one obtained in breach of the rules of natural justice for the purpose of judicial review. The loss of his right to be heard was not a procedural impropriety or denial of natural justice. Nor was he entitled to certiorari. In the public law context of removal from the jurisdiction of an alien, a litigant must answer for the failings of his legal advisers.
Lord Bridge said that any other decision would come ‘at the cost of opening such a wide door which would indeed seriously undermine the principle of finality in decision-making.’
The respondent was an Iraqi student who overstayed his leave to remain in the United Kingdom. When he was served with a notice of the Secretary of State’s decision to deport him he instructed solicitors to lodge an appeal. When a hearing date for the appeal was fixed the solicitors wrote to notify him of the date but negligently sent the letter to his previous address and the respondent never received it. The adjudicator subsequently dismissed the appeal on the basis of the documents before him since neither the respondent nor his solicitors had appeared. When the solicitors received notice of the dismissal they again misaddressed the communication intended to inform the respondent of the result, so that by the time he knew of the dismissal of his appeal it was too late for him to appeal further against the adjudicator’s decision. The respondent applied for, and was granted, certiorari to quash the adjudicator’s decision, the judge holding that he was bound by a previous decision of the Court of Appeal which decided that certiorari ought to be granted where the negligence of the applicant’s solicitors had deprived him of an oral hearing. The judge’s decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The Secretary of State appealed to the House of Lords.
Held — A party to a dispute who had been afforded an opportunity of presenting his case to the person deciding the dispute but who had lost the opportunity to have his case heard through the fault of the legal advisers to whom he had entrusted the conduct of the dispute on his behalf could not complain that he had been the victim of a procedural impropriety or that natural justice had been denied to him, and it made no difference whether the matter in dispute raised private law or public law issues. Accordingly, the respondent was not entitled to judicial review of the adjudicator’s decision and the Secretary of State’s appeal would therefore be allowed.

Judges:

Lord Bridge, Lord Roskill, Lord Brandon, Lord Oliver, Lord Goff

Citations:

[1989] 3 WLR 1294, [1989] 3 All ER 843, [1990] 1 AC 876, [1989] UKHL 7

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigtaion Act 1971 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v West Sussex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Albert and Maud Johnson Trust CA 1973
. .
Overruled – Rahmani and Others v Diggines HL 20-Mar-1986
The Court of Appeal had overturned the rejection of an administrative appeal from a deportation decision, on the ground that there had been a denial of natural justice when the person involved in an administrative appeal did not attend the hearing . .
Overruled – Regina v Diggines, ex parte Rahmani CA 1985
R, had failed to attend the hearing of her appeal from a refusal to extend her stay in the UK. Her advisers had failed to note her new address and had been unable to notify her of the hearing. The appeal was dismissed in her absence. The adjudicator . .

Cited by:

Cited – Maqsood v The Special Adjudicator, The Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 3-Dec-2001
The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to proceed with his appeal in his absence. He, his advisers and his witness had gone to the wrong court. The court had changed the venue from previous hearings, but the notice of hearing had not . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Ayres Admn 20-Oct-2004
The prosecutor appealed a decision of the magistrates to dismiss the case for abuse of process, having failed to comply with several and repeated directions as to the management of the case. He said that he had not been given opportunity to make . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal ex parte Haile CA 2002
The adjudicator in the asylum application had made a crucial mistake about the identity of the political party in Ethiopia, with which the claimant was connected. The error was not drawn to the attention of the IAT. The evidence necessary to prove . .
Cited – FP (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 23-Jan-2007
The claimants said that rules which allowed an appeal tribunal to proceed in their absence when they were absent through no fault of their own, were unlawful in depriving them of a fair trial. The claimants had each moved house but their former . .
Cited – Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland SC 23-May-2012
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal . .
Cited – Helena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Applied – Formosa Plastics Corporation USA v Chauhan and others CA 6-Apr-1998
The defendant sought a second adjournment of his application for leave to appeal against summary judgment for $21m with interest in respect of a judgment obtained in Texas. The defendant was said to have given his personal guarantee for the purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Immigration, Natural Justice

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.180545

Gourlay, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board: CA 14 Jul 2017

Does the established practice of the High Court, to make no order for costs for or against an inferior tribunal or court which plays no active part in a judicial review of one of its decisions, extend to the Board?

Judges:

Gloster VP CA, David Richards, Kickinbottom LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1003, [2017] 1 WLR 4107, [2017] WLR(D) 474

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

First Instance main judgment – Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham CA 27-Feb-2004
The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent.
Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Gourlay, Regina (on The Application of) v Parole Board SC 4-Dec-2020
The appellant life prisoner had successfully challenged a decision of the parole board, but had later been refused his costs on the basis that the Board had been acting in effect as a judicial body. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.589928

Watkins-Singh, Regina (on the Application of) v The Governing Body of Aberdare Girls’ High School and Another: Admn 29 Jul 2008

Miss Singh challenged her school’s policy which operated to prevent her wearing while at school a steel bangle, a Kara. She said this was part of her religion as a Sikh.
Held: Earlier comparable applications had been made under human rights law, but this was under the 1976 Act. The evidence established that the Sikh religion required adherents to show the five outward signs of Sikhism which included the Kara. The court had to establish was ‘whether the claimant is placed under a great ‘disadvantage’ or has suffered a ‘detriment’ because she was unable to wear the Kara which she regarded as a manifestation of her religion and race of exceptional importance. ‘In this case it was too high to only accept a requirement that she shoud wear the kara.’ The court had ‘little doubt that the claimant genuinely and honestly attaches exceptional importance to wearing her Kara and thereby satisfies the subjective requirement.’ The evidence also suggested that the bangle was of sufficient significance to Sikhs. The claimant therefore suffered the detriment required. In setting the policy, the school did not consider its duties under its own anti-discrimination policy and expressly excluded consideration of it. The claim succeeded.
In judicial review proceedings, the court: ‘must proceed on the factual basis put forward by the defendant or resolve any disputes of fact in the defendant’s favour. This principle has been frequently applied.’

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1865 (Admin), [2008] ELR 561, [2008] FCR 203

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 1(1A), Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000, International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Mandla (Sewa Singh) v Dowell Lee HL 24-Mar-1982
A private school had refused to admit the claimant, a sikh, because he would be unable to wear the school uniform. He claimed racial discrimination. The school denied that being a Sikh was a membership of a racial or ethnic group.
Held: Sikhs . .
Cited – Playfoot (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Millais School Admn 16-Jul-2007
The claimant sought to be allowed to wear a purity ring at school. The ring infringed the school’s uniform code. She said that the ring expressed her desire religious to remain pure before marriage.
Held: The wearing of the ring was not . .
Cited – E v The Governing Body of JFS and Another Admn 16-Jul-2008
Application for leave to appeal. . .
Cited – X, Regina (on the Application of) v Y School Admn 21-Feb-2007
The court was asked whether a school was entitled to refuse to allow a Muslim girl to wear the niqab full face veil at school. The reasons were ‘first educational factors resulting from a teacher being unable to see the face of the girl with a . .
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 . .
Cited – British Medical Association v Chaudhary CA 27-Jul-2007
. .
Cited – MEC for Education: KwazuluNatal and Others v Pillay 5-Oct-2007
(Constitutional Court of South Africa) A rule which prevented a Tamil-Hindu girl from wearing a nose stud which was central to her cultural and religious identity was discriminatory on religious and cultural grounds. The court rejected an argument . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – DH v Czech Repiublic ECHR 7-Feb-2006
The claimants, 18 Roma children complained, saying that they had automatically been placed in schools for children with special needs by virtue of their racial origin. . .
Cited – Hampson v Department of Education and Science CA 1989
Balcombe LJ said: ‘In my judgment ‘justifiable’ requires an objective balance between the discriminatory effect of the condition and the reasonable needs of the party who applies the condition.’ The task of the Tribunal hearing such a complaint is . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Elias CA 10-Oct-2006
The claimant said that a scheme drawn by the defendant for compensating British civilians interned by the Japanese during the second world war was indirectly discriminatory on racial grounds by requiring a national origin link with the UK. She had . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Elias CA 10-Oct-2006
The claimant said that a scheme drawn by the defendant for compensating British civilians interned by the Japanese during the second world war was indirectly discriminatory on racial grounds by requiring a national origin link with the UK. She had . .
Cited – Regina v Camden London Borough Council Ex Parte Cran and Others QBD 25-Jan-1995
A designation of an area as a controlled parking area was vitiated by the failure of the Local Authority to consult locally. The court expanded on the principles for consultation set out in Gunning: ‘What kind and amount of consultation is required . .
Cited – Baker and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others CA 28-Feb-2008
Dyson LJ considered the interaction between race relations law and planning permission in the context of gypsy encampments. He looked at section 71 of the 1976 Act and said: ‘In my judgment, it is important to emphasise that the section 71(1) duty . .
Cited – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 9-Nov-2007
The action group appealed against refusal of a judicial review of guidelines as to the employment of non-EU doctors, saying that they were in effect immigration rules and issuable only under the 1971 Act. The court had said that since the guidance . .
Cited – Serif v Greece ECHR 14-Dec-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 9; Not necessary to examine Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award . .
Cited – Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .

Cited by:

Cited – National Secular Society and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Bideford Town Council Admn 10-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged the placing of a prayer on the agenda of the respondent’s meetings.
Held: The claim succeeded. The placing of such elements on the Agenda was outside the powers given to the Council, and the action was ultra vires: . .
Cited – Robson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Salford City Council CA 20-Jan-2015
The appellants, all severely disabled appealed against the refusal of their judicial review of the substantial withdrawal by the Council of a service providing them with transport to local day care facilities. They said that the council had failed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Discrimination, Judicial Review

Updated: 22 September 2022; Ref: scu.271236

The Attorney-General of The Gambia v N’Jie: PC 3 May 1961

(West Africa) Lord Denning said: ‘The words ‘person aggrieved’ are of wide import and should not be subjected to a restrictive interpretation. They do not include, of course, a mere busybody who is interfering in things which do not concern him; but they do include a person who has a genuine grievance because an order has been made which prejudicially affects his interests.’

Judges:

Radcliffe, Denning and Guest LL

Citations:

[1961] UKPC 19, [1961] AC 617

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Judicial Review

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445304

Rana, Regina (on The Application of) v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum) and Another; MR (Pakistan) v Upper Tribunal: Admn 21 Dec 2010

The court was asked ‘Is a decision of a judge of the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) refusing permission to appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) amenable to judicial review on any ground or grounds other than (a) outright excess of jurisdiction, or (b) denial of procedural justice, as those two grounds were described by the Court of Appeal in R (On the application of Cart) v the Upper Tribunal and others [2010] 4 All ER 714, [2010] EWCA Civ 859 (‘Cart’), and, if so, on what other ground or grounds. That is the preliminary issue which has to be determined in this application for judicial review.’
Held: The reasoning in Cart, in which the decision that was under review came from the Social Entitlement Chamber, applied to unappealable decisions of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the Upper Tribunal too.

Judges:

Sullivan LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3558 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – EBA v Advocate General for Scotland SC 21-Jun-2011
The appellant had sought to challenge refusal of disability living allowance. Ultimately her request a judicial review of the Upper Tribunal’s decion was rejected on the basis that the UT, being a court of superior record, was not susceptible to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Judicial Review

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441244

Sharma v Brown-Antoine, Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions and others: PC 30 Nov 2006

(Trinidad and Tobago) Complaint was made as to a decision to begin professional discliplinary proceedings against a senior member of the judiciary.
Held: Although a decision to prosecute was in principle susceptible to judicial review on the ground of interference with a prosecutor’s judgment, such relief would in practice be granted extremely rarely and that the court had to be satisfied, not only that the claim had a realistic prospect of success, but also that the complaint could not be resolved within the criminal process, either at the trial or by way of an application to stay for abuse of process. Since all the issues could best be investigated and resolved in a single set of criminal proceedings, permission for judicial review ought not to have been granted and had rightly been set aside. The test on the permission application is whether on the material before the court, the claimants have an arguable case which merits an oral hearing
Lord Bingham, for the Privy Council, said: ‘The rule of law required that, subject to any immunity or exemption provided by law, the criminal law of the land should apply to all alike. A person is not to be singled out for adverse treatment because he or she holds a high and dignified office of State, but nor can the holding of such an office excuse conduct which would lead to the prosecution of one not holding such an office. The maintenance of public confidence in the administration of justice required that it be, and be seen to be, even-handed.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Mance

Citations:

[2006] UKPC 57, [2007] 1 WLR 780

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

Cited – Panday v Virgil PC 9-Apr-2008
(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant’s appeal against conviction had succeeded on the basis of apparent bias in the tribunal. He now appealed the order remitting the case to be reheard, saying that a fair trial was no longer possible.
Held: The . .
Cited – Corner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
See also – McNicholls v Judicial and Legal Service Commission PC 17-Feb-2010
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant, the Islands’ chief magistrate appealed against a decision to proceed with disciplinary allegations against him. He had refused to give evidence in a prosecution of the then Chief Justice, though his own statement . .
Cited – Sher and Others v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Others Admn 21-Jul-2010
The claimants, Pakistani students in the UK on student visas, had been arrested and held by the defendants under the 2000 Act before being released 13 days later without charge. They were at first held incognito. They said that their arrest and . .
Cited – Chaytor and Others, Regina v CACD 30-Jul-2010
The defendants had been members of the Houses of Commons and of Lords. They faced charges of dishonesty in respect of their expenses claims. They now appealed a finding that they were not subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament under . .
Cited – Loughlin, Re Application for Judicial Review SC 18-Oct-2017
The court was asked as to the circumstances in which sentences passed on offenders who have given assistance to prosecuting authorities should be referred back to the sentencing court under section 74 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Judicial Review

Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.247459

Buglife, Regina (on The Application of) v Natural England: Admn 30 Mar 2011

The court established a new principle (concerning time limits for starting judicial review proceedings and the effect of the ECJ’s decision in Uniplex) and extended the law (concerning multi-stage EIAs provided for by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2008).

Judges:

Anthony Thornton QC J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 746 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Environment

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.440073

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London: Admn 27 Jun 2013

The coroner was to hold an inquest into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, a prominent Russian exile. The Secretary of State issued a public interest immunity certificate in respect of several documents sought for the inquest, which, in part, the Coroner rejected. The court considered the possibility that a Properly Interested Person should be allowed as interested parties, and whether any proceedings, or part of them might not be held openly.
Held: It was at the court’s discretion within the rules to decide whether a person should be joined as an interested third party in judicial review proceedings. That someone had been accepted as a properly interested person by the Coroner, that does not mean that he need be such on a judicial review.

Judges:

Goldring, Treacy LJJ, Mitting J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1786 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 261

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Gazette

Statutes:

Coroners Rules 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v South London Coroner ex parte Thompson 8-Jul-1982
The court discussed the function of the coroner and his inquest.
Lord Lane CJ said: ‘The coroner’s task in a case such as this is a formidable one, and no one would dispute that; that is quite apart from the difficulties which inevitably arise . .
Cited – Regina on the application of Ahmed v HM Coroner South and East Cumbria 2009
Irwin J considered the wide discretion given to Coroners: ‘There is no hard and fast obligation on the part of the Coroner to disclose any witness statements or material: it is a matter of the exercise of discretion.’ . .

Cited by:

See Also – Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London Admn 27-Nov-2013
The SS had claimed public interest immunity (PII) in respect of several documents requested for an inquest into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, a prominent Russian exile. The coroner had rejected the claim for several, and the SS now appealed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Litigation Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 10 September 2022; Ref: scu.511224

Regina v In the Matter of an Application for Permission To Apply for Judicial Review Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Bora: Admn 14 Jun 1999

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld Mr Justice Latham His Honour Judge Myerson

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 3526, [1999] EWHC Admin 545

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Bora CACD 23-Dec-1998
The defendant appealed a conviction for supplying heroin. He had been present at different stages of what was a supply of a substantial amount of the drug, but was at no time seen in possession either of the drug or money. The main prosecution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 September 2022; Ref: scu.139809

McCourt, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board for England and Wales and Others: Admn 1 Sep 2020

The mother of a murder victim sought to challenge the release of her murderer on parole. The court considered her standing to seek review, saying: ‘In defining the standing requirement, Parliament chose a deliberately open-textured phrase: an applicant must demonstrate a ‘sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates’.’

Judges:

Lady Justice Macur and Mr Justice Chamberlain

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 2320 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Senior Courts Act 1981 31(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 September 2022; Ref: scu.653302

RG v the Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 11 Apr 2006

The applicant sought permission to appeal against a refusal of a judicial review. The application was being heard seven months later.
Held: Permission was refused. Delay was inimical to justice. The solicitors, the Legal Services Commission and the transcibers had to overhaul their administrative procedures to ensure that communicatins were properly logged, and email being not 100% reliable should not be relied upon exclusively. Solicitors should have systems in place to chase matters when they did not receive a reply within a few days.

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 396, Times 12-May-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Immigration

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.241971

Cookson and Clegg Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Ministry of Defence and Another: CA 22 Apr 2005

Renewed application for leave to appeal granted.
Held: For an economic operator, if a claim under the Public Contracts Regulations may be brought, a claim for judicial review may not

Judges:

Sir William Aldous

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 577

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Judicial Review, Administrative

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.226048

Regina on the Application of Feakins v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 4 Nov 2003

The applicant farmer had substantial volumes of potentially contaminated carcasses on his land. The respondent derogated from the European regulations which would have arranged for the disposal of the carcasses. The respondent challenged the standing of the applicant to seek review of the decision. The judge acknowledged the possibility that the applicant had only his private interests at heart, but considered that he could proceed because of the significance of the decision under review. The applicant’s motive was capable of being relevant, but was not such here as to make the application an abuse.
Dyson LJ addressed the question of abuse of process in the context of Judicial Review proceedings, saying: ‘In my judgment, if a claimant has no sufficient private interest to support a claim to standing, then he should not be accorded standing merely because he raises an issue in which there is, objectively speaking, a public interest. As Sedley J said in R v Somerset County Council, Ex p Dixon [1997] JPL 1030, when considering the issue of standing, the court had to ensure that the claimant was not prompted by an ill motive, and was not a mere busybody or a trouble-maker. Thus, if a claimant seeks to challenge a decision in which he has no private law interest, it is difficult to conceive of circumstances in which the court will accord him standing, even where there is a public interest in testing the lawfulness of the decision, if the claimant is acting out of ill-will or for some other improper purpose. It is an abuse of process to permit a claimant to bring a claim in such circumstances. If the real reason why a claimant wishes to challenge a decision in which, objectively, there is a public interest is not that he has a genuine concern about the decision, but some other reason, then that is material to the question whether he should be accorded standing.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1546, Times 07-Nov-2003, Gazette 02-Jan-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 1761

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mount Cook Land Ltd and Another v Westminster City Council CA 14-Oct-2003
The applicants had sought judicial review of the defendant’s grant of planning permission for the redevelopment of the former CandA building in Oxford Street. Though the application for leave to apply had been successful, and a full hearing took . .
Appeal from – Feakins v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 20-Dec-2002
. .
See Also – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
The farmer complained that the department had, during the foot and mouth outbreak destroyed animals which did not belong to the owner of the land. The department said that the farmer had disposed of his land at an undervalue to defeat his creditors. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
The farmer complained that the department had, during the foot and mouth outbreak destroyed animals which did not belong to the owner of the land. The department said that the farmer had disposed of his land at an undervalue to defeat his creditors. . .
Cited – Land Securities Plc and Others v Fladgate Fielder (A Firm) CA 18-Dec-2009
The claimants wanted planning permission to redevelop land. The defendant firm of solicitors, their tenants, had challenged the planning permission. The claimants alleged that that opposition was a tortious abuse because its true purpose was to . .
Now set aside – Feakins and Another v Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 8-Jun-2006
The claimants sought to re-open their appeal saying that the respondent department had failed properly to describe the workings of the clawback scheme under which its claim had been made.
Held: A DEFRA official had provided materially . .
Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
See Also – Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
. .
See Also – Feakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513) CA 9-Dec-2005
The department complained that the defendants had entered into a transaction with their farm at an undervalue so as to defeat its claim for recovery of sums due. The transaction used the grant of a tenancy by the first chargee.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Environment, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.187505

Davies and others v Financial Services Authority: CA 30 Jul 2003

The claimants sought judicial review of decisions by the respondents proposing prohibition orders.
Held: The applicants had open to them appeals against the decisions so far taken. Accordingly no right existed for judicial review. The scheme of the Act required the supervision of the claimants to be by the procedures under the Act.

Judges:

Kennedy, Mummery, Carnwath LJJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1128, Times 06-Oct-2003, Gazette 02-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Financial Services

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.184897

Saleem v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 13 Jun 2000

A rule which deemed service on an asylum applicant two days after postage of a special adjudicator’s determination irrespective of whether it was in fact received was outside the powers given to the Secretary, and is of no effect. The Act gave power to make rules, but the receipt of the determination was fundamental to the exercise of the rights under the Act. ‘There is an analogy here with the principles established under Article 6 of the ECHR. Immigration and asylum cases have not been held by the ECHR to be ‘the determination of his civil rights and obligations’ for the purpose of Article 6. Furthermore, Article 6 does not guarantee a right of appeal. But if the State establishes such a right it must ensure that people within its jurisdiction enjoy the fundamental guarantees in Article 6′. The right of appeal to an independent appellate body was a fundamental or basic right akin to the right of unimpeded access to a court, an infringement of which must be either expressly authorised by or arise by necessary implication from an Act of Parliament.

Judges:

Lord Justice Roch, Lord Justice Mummery and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Times 22-Jun-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 186, [2001] 1 WLR 443

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971, Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996 2070, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 . .
Cited – A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .
Cited – BA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others SC 26-Nov-2009
The court was asked whether the expression ‘an asylum claim, or a human rights claim’ in section 92(4)(a) of the 2002 Act includes any second or subsequent claim that the asylum seeker may make, or only a second or subsequent claim which has been . .
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.147219

Arunthavaraja v Administrative Court Office: Admn 9 Jul 2009

The defendant sought to appeal against an order for his extradition. He now sought leave to bring judicial review against of the refusal of the court office to accept his notice had been defective, being out of time.
Held: Judicial review was not the appropriate way to challenge such a decision. Permission to apply was refused. However, the court observed obiter, that ‘service would be defective if an unsealed copy of the notice were served within the seven-day period, provided of course that it were in identical terms to the notice as filed. Even if service of an unsealed copy is technically defective, it may well be that the remedial power in CPR rule 3.10 could be invoked to cure the defect without offending the strict requirements of the 2003 Act.’

Judges:

Richards LJ, Maddison J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 18921 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Extradition Act 2003

Cited by:

Cited – Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland SC 23-May-2012
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, Judicial Review

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425529

EBA v The Advocate General for Scotland: SCS 10 Sep 2010

(Inner House) The petitioner wished to appeal against refusal of disability living allowance. Her appeal to the first tier tribunal was rejected, and her request to the Upper Tribunal for leave to appeal was refused. When, she then sought leave to bring judicial review of that refusal, it was said that decisions of the UT were not subject to review save in limited circumstances (excess of jurisdiction or unfairness of procedure).
Held: The court allowed the reclaiming motion, refused the cross-appeal and remitted the case to the Lord Ordinary to proceed as accords.

Judges:

Lord President, Lord Kingearth, Lord Brodie

Citations:

[2010] ScotCS CSIH – 78, 2010 SLT 1047, 2010 GWD 31-634, [2010] STC 2689, 2010 SCLR 759, 2011 SC 70, [2010] STI 2617, [2010] CSIH 78

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission HL 17-Dec-1968
There are no degrees of nullity
The plaintiffs had owned mining property in Egypt. Their interests were damaged and or sequestrated and they sought compensation from the Respondent Commission. The plaintiffs brought an action for the declaration rejecting their claims was a . .
At Outer House – EBA, Re Judicial Review SCS 31-Mar-2010
The petitioner claimed disability living allowance. Her claim was refused, and eventually also at the Upper Tribunal, of whose decision she now sought judicial review.
Held: The Upper Tribunal being designated as a court of superior record. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
Appeal from – EBA v Advocate General for Scotland SC 21-Jun-2011
The appellant had sought to challenge refusal of disability living allowance. Ultimately her request a judicial review of the Upper Tribunal’s decion was rejected on the basis that the UT, being a court of superior record, was not susceptible to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Benefits, Judicial Review

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424090

Shoesmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Ofsted and Others: Admn 23 Apr 2010

The claimant challenged her dismissal as Director of children’s services at the respondent council following an adverse report into the Baby P death identified her department as being responsible. She said that the first defendant had allowed its report to be manipulated at the request of the minister as to transfer all blame to her department.
Held: The claim failed. Foskett J considered the use of oral evidence in judicial review proceedings, saying: ‘Ordinarily, an application for judicial review is determined without hearing oral evidence. This approach reflects a number of considerations, but judicial review is essentially seen as a procedure for resolving an issue of law and not one of fact.
There are certain (albeit rare) circumstances in which oral evidence is given and cross-examination takes place in judicial review proceedings.’

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2011] PTSR D13, [2010] EWHC 852 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 2004 20(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 . .
See Also – Shoesmith, Regina (on The Application of) v OFSTED and Others Admn 10-Nov-2009
. .
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 by:

Appeal from – Shoesmith, Regina (on The Application of) v OFSTED and Others CA 27-May-2011
The claimant appealed against dismissal of her claim. She had been head of Child Services at Haringey. After the notorious violent death of Baby P, the Secretary of State called for an inquiry under the Act. He then removed her as director. She . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Administrative, Judicial Review

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408644