Site icon swarb.co.uk

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

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

Judges:

Pitchford J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Damages, Personal Injury, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.175140

Exit mobile version