swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Administrative - From: 2002 To: 2002
This page lists 37 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Regina (Loudon) v Bury School Organisation Committee; Admn 2002 - [2002] EWHC 2749 (Admin)
ABCIFER v Secretary of State for Defence [2002] EWHC 2119
2002
Scott Baker J
Judicial Review, Administrative
1 Citers
Downderry Construction Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and Another [2002] EWHC 2 (Admin)
11 Jan 2002
Admn
Richards J
Planning, Administrative, Estoppel
The applicant had an existing planning permission. They sought and received confirmation from the local authority that the permission remained in effect. They then sought a certificate of lawful use. The letter confirming the permission had been issued in error, but the claimant asserted that the council were estopped from refusing the certificate. The inspector said the developer knew enough not to have relied upon the letter. Held: A public authority may be subject to an estoppel even in exercising its statutory duties in exceptional circumstances. Here the representation made by the council was clear and unambiguous, and the applicant believed it and relied upon it to his detriment. It was not justified to say he should have known the falsity of the representation. There is no requirement as to the reasonableness of the claimant relying upon the representation. The inspector erred in law and his decision was quashed.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 191 192
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Barron, Regina (on the Application of) v Surrey County Council; CA 18-Jan-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 53
Nash v Chelsea College of Art and Design [2002] EWCA Civ 69
24 Jan 2002
CA
Buxton LJ
Education, Administrative
Application for permission to appeal against the decision: "The claimant, Miss Aletta Nash, complains of the second year assessment that she received in her course at the Chelsea College of Art, the respondent. That assessment was made as long ago as May 1998, and was considered by the Board of Examiners of the College in July 1998. Miss Nash complains in substance about the procedure in that extenuating circumstances (that are not necessary to recite) have not been taken into proper account."
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Zeqiri Times, 15 February 2002; [2002] UKHL 3; [2002] Imm AR 296; [2002] ACD 60; [2002] INLR 291
24 Jan 2002
HL
Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Mackay of Clashfern Lord Hoffmann Lord Millett Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Immigration, Judicial Review, Administrative
The applicant sought to resist an order for his return to Germany, the first country of call after escaping Kosovo. He asserted that Germany was not complying with its international obligations. He said the Gashi case had created a legitimate expectation that he would not be so returned, and that therefore his application for asylum should be considered. Held: The review was refused. In the normal way a decision maker reconsidering a decision will do so in the light of material circumstances then prevailing. The decision in Gashi was not clear cut. The denial of a legitimate expectation is a form of abuse of power. It is broader than what would be an estoppel at private law, and required that a public authority acting contrary to the representation would be acting "with conspicuous unfairness". There were no reasonable grounds for believing the Secretary had made any representation that he felt that Gashi had the effect claimed.
1990 Dublin Convention - Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 2(2) - Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 6
1 Citers
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Mason, Wood, McClelland, Tierney v Regina; CACD 13-Feb-2002 - Gazette, 21 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Crim 385; [2002] 2 Crim App R 38
Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department; QBD 21-Feb-2002 - Times, 27 February 2002; Gazette, 28 March 2002; 2002] EWHC 230 (Admin); [2002] 1 WLR 1857
T and others v Mental Health Review Tribunal and G [2002] EWHC 247 (Admin)
22 Feb 2002
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Scott Baker
Health, Administrative, Information
The applicant's former partner, G, had been detained under the Act. She had obtained an injunction to keep him away, but whilst exercising staying contact with her child, he had killed his own parents, and was now detained. The tribunal had ordered his conditional release. She sought a copy of the decision, and now sought judicial review of the refusal to supply a copy. An order had been made that the tribunal should place a note of her views among the hearing papers, and one was sent, but was not so considered. Held: The tribunal argued that the tribunal's activities were patient centered, not victim centered. It had never exercised its discretion to publicise a decision to a third party. The claimant argued the tribunal as a creature of statute had no jurisdiction beyond its statutory powers. Although she had no reason to be told of some elements, it might be that she should know of a condition as to residence, but not other matters such as the assessment of the risk he now presented. The tribunal had a discretion which it had failed to exercise. It should reconsider the decision as to the making of information available to the claimant and in the express light of her letter.
Mental Health Act 1983 37 41 - Administration of Justice Act 1960 12 - Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983 (S.I 1983 No. 942) 21(5)
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Secretary of State for the Home Department v International Transport Roth Gmbh and others; CA 22-Feb-2002 - Times, 26 February 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 158; [2002] 3 WLR 344; [2003] QB 728
Regina (Howard and Another) v Secretary of State for Health Times, 28 March 2002; Gazette, 23 May 2002
15 Mar 2002
QBD
Justice Scott Baker
Administrative, Health Professions, Human Rights
The applicants sought orders that enquiries into the activities of doctors under the Act should be held in public. Held: The Act contained no presumption that enquiries should be in public, and the Wagstaff case created no general principle to that effect. The right to free expression did not include the right to receive from others information they were unwilling to impart. It was for the Secretary of State to make a decision in each case, and his decisions stood.
National Health Service Act 1977 2 - European Convention on Human Rights Art 10.1
1 Cites
Regina (Persey and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Times, 28 March 2002; Gazette, 23 May 2002; [2002] EWHC 371 (Admin); [2003] QB 794; [2002] 3 WLR 704
15 Mar 2002
Admn
Lord Justice Simon Brown and Mr Justice Scott Baker
Human Rights, Administrative, Agriculture, Information, Judicial Review, Media
The applicants sought an order that the government enquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak should be held in public. They argued that the need to re-establish public faith made a decision not to hold the enquiries in public irrational, and that a failure to hold the enquiry in public infringed the applicant's human rights. Held: The distinction between freedom of expression, and of access to information was central. Art 10 created no obligation to provide a public forum for discussion of issues. On the question of whether there is a presumption that an inquiry would be held in public (Wagstaff), this must be approached on a case by case basis with no presumption either way.
European Convention on Human Rights 10
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Laboratoire Monique Remy v Commission T-218/01; [2002] EUECJ T-218/01
21 Mar 2002
ECFI
European, Administrative
1. The concepts of force majeure and unforeseeable circumstances contain, besides an objective element relating to abnormal circumstances unconnected with the party in question, a subjective element involving the obligation, on his part, to guard against the consequences of the abnormal event by taking appropriate steps without making unreasonable sacrifices. In particular, the party in question must pay close attention to the course of the procedure and, in particular, demonstrate diligence in order to comply with the prescribed time-limits. Thus, the concepts of force majeure and unforeseeable circumstances do not apply to a situation in which, objectively, a diligent and prudent person would have been able to take the necessary steps before the expiry of the period prescribed for instituting proceedings. (see para. 17)
2. The fact that the Commission does not refer, in a measure, to the possibility of starting judicial proceedings and/or of lodging a complaint with the European Ombudsman, in accordance with Article 230 EC or Article 195 EC, is a breach of the obligations which that institution has taken upon itself by its adoption of the Code of good administrative behaviour for staff of the European Commission in their relations with the public which is set out in the Annex to the Rules of Procedure of the Commission. (see para. 25)
3. The concept of excusable error, the direct source of which is a concern for observance of the principles of legal certainty and of the protection of legitimate expectations, can concern only exceptional circumstances in which, in particular, the conduct of the institution concerned was, either alone or to a decisive extent, such as to give rise to a pardonable confusion in the mind of a party acting in good faith and exercising all the diligence required of a normally prudent person. Although such may be the case where the commencement of an action out of time is caused by the provision, by the institution concerned, of wrong information creating pardonable confusion in the mind of such a person, or where the breach by the institution concerned of certain of its rules of procedure, such as, for example, a code of behaviour, has created such confusion, it cannot be the case, where the person concerned cannot harbour any doubt that the measure notified to him is in the nature of a decision. Indeed, in the latter case, the absence of information relating to the possibility of an appeal cannot in any way mislead that person.(see para. 30)
[ Bailii ]
Ipsea Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Education and Schools [2002] EWHC 504 (Admin)
26 Mar 2002
Admn
Mr Justice Newman
Education, Administrative
IPSEA (a national charity active in supporting children with special educational needs) applied for judicial review in relation to the status of non-statutory guidance issued by the Secretary of State in a document called the 'SEN Toolkit'. The court refused to grant a judicial review but gave useful guidance on how the guidance in the toolkit might be amended and clarified and the context in which it should be viewed i.e. as secondary to the statutes and statutory codes.
[ Bailii ]
Wooder, Regina (on the Application of) v Feggetter and Dr Grah Times, 28 May 2002; Gazette, 30 May 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 554; [2003] QB 219
25 Apr 2002
CA
Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Brooke and Lord Justice Sedley
Health, Administrative
The patient challenged the treatment given to him against his will as a detained mental patient. He said the opinion of the second doctor as required under the Act, had not been put into writing. Held: Following Wilkinson, which allowed a challenge to such decisions, it was inevitable that a written opinion would be required from the second doctor. Otherwise the challenge would not be possible. The duty did not go so far as to require disclosure of the request to the second doctor for that opinion.
Mental Health Act 1983 53
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Clarke v London Borough of Enfield [2002] EWCA Civ 1278
9 May 2002
CA
Administrative
Where a decision of a public decision-maker is quashed and the decision falls to be re-taken, it will or at least may be re-taken in light of the legal and factual context prevailing at the time the fresh decision is made.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Miller v Law Society Times, 03 June 2002; Gazette, 27 June 2002
14 May 2002
ChD
Mr Geoffrey Vos, QC
Legal Professions, Administrative
The claimant sought damages from the respondent for breach of their private duty of care to him. They had intervened in his practice. He alleged that the investigating accountant had been negligent in his actions. Held: The Law Society owed the claimant no private duty of care. They acted in performing a statutory function, and the statute provided a remedy. That remedy was all that was available to the claimant. The accountant's investigation was integral to the disciplinary process set down in the 1974 Act, and could lead either to intervention, or to proceedings before the tribunal. A private law action could not intrude into the exclusively public field of solicitors' disciplinary processes.
Solicitors' Accounting Rules 1991 27 - Solicitors Act 1974
Asha Foundation, Regina (on the Application of) v The Millennium Commission Times, 06 June 2002; Gazette, 06 June 2002; Gazette, 20 June 2002; [2002] EWHC 916 (Admin)
14 May 2002
Admn
Administrative, Judicial Review
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.
National Lottery etc Act 1991 41
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities C-133/99; [2002] EUECJ C-133/99
6 Jun 2002
ECJ
European, Administrative
Europa EAGGF - Clearance of accounts.
EAGGF
[ Bailii ]
Ryder, Regina (on the Application of) v The Registrar of Births, Marriages and Deaths [2002] EWHC 1191 (Admin)
20 Jun 2002
Admn
Mr Justice Lightman
Administrative, Family
Gilliatt The claimant was born in 1949 with barely formed male genitalia. He was registered at birth as a male child. He lived for some of his life as a male and for some time as a female until he underwent gender reassignment surgery in 1999, since which time the claimed lived life entirely as a female. An application to have the birth certificate amended to reflect the gender change was refused by the Registrar. S 29(1) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 forbids unauthorised alterations of the register which must include the sex of the child. The court followed previous cases when it was decided that the register is a historical record. It accurately recorded the fact of gender at birth and the current case law did not allow amendment (appeal to the House of Lords pending in the case of Bellinger). Unless the House of Lords decided otherwise or Parliament provided otherwise, the claimant could not succeed in having the birth register amended.
Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 29(1)
[ Bailii ]
Leung v Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine [2002] EWHC 1358 (Admin)
5 Jul 2002
Admn
Silber J
Administrative
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 to admit the evidence in all the circumstances.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Winsor v Bloom and Others; In re Railtrack plc (in railway administration) Times, 15 July 2002; Gazette, 12 September 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 955
10 Jul 2002
CA
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Robert Walker
Utilities, Administrative, Insolvency
The claimant, the Rail regulator appealed a decision that he had to apply to court for directions under the 1986 Act before allowing other rail operators access to the track after the company had gone into railway administration. Held: Section 17 of the 1993 Act was sufficient to allow the regulator to make such an order without first approaching the court. In exercising the power the regulator had to have regard to the interests of others which would not be reflected in insolvency proceedings, and the importance of that role overrode if necessary the interests in the company.
Railways Act 1993 17 - Insolvency Act 1986 11(3)(d)
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Rose and Another) v Secretary of State for Health and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Times, 22 August 2002; Gazette, 10 October 2002; [2002] EWHC 1593 (Admin)
26 Jul 2002
Admn
Mr Justice Scott Baker
Children, Human Rights, Administrative, Health
Applications were made, challenging the refusal of the Secretary of State for Health, and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, to institute a system where a child born by artificial insemination could make enquiries as to his or her parenthood. Held: The knowledge of facts about one's biological parenthood was part of the right to family or private life. Accordingly the decisions made did engage the children's Human Rights, and the appropriate tests should be applied to that decision making process.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Lillie and Reed v Newcastle City Council, Barker, Jones, Saradjian, Wardell; QBD 30-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWHC 1600 (QB)
Saxena v UK Passport Service and others [2002] EWCA Civ 1782
10 Oct 2002
CA
Administrative
Permission for application for judicial review misconceived and refused.
[ Bailii ]
Britannic Asset Management Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Pensions Ombudsman Times, 22 October 2002; Gazette, 14 November 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1405
14 Oct 2002
CA
Phillips MR, Chadwick Keene LLJ
Administrative, Financial Services
The Ombudsman appealed a finding that it had no jurisdiction over the respondents in their provision of administrative support for pensions schemes. Held: A person who took an 'act of administration concerned with the scheme' was not necessarily a person 'concerned with the administration of the scheme'. There are important distinctions between the kinds of persons involved with the many administrative acts, and the nature of their involvement. The mere calculation of benefits was not enough.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Nicholas Charles Edward Land and others v the Executive Counsel of the Joint Disciplinary Scheme [2002] EWHC 2086 (Admin)
15 Oct 2002
QBD
Mr Justice Stanley Burton
Administrative, Professional Negligence
The applicants were partners and staff in Ernst & Young. They sought a stay of disciplinary proceedings brought against them by the accountancy regulators pending resolution of the civil claim against them in respect of closely related issues involving the Equitable Life insurance company. Held: There was at this stage no sufficient burden imposed on the defendants to amount to an unfairness. It was not to be presumed that documents produced for the disciplinary proceedings would prejudice the litigation.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Tamil Information Centre) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 30 October 2002; Gazette, 14 November 2002; [2002] EWHC 2155 (Admin)
18 Oct 2002
Admn
Forbes J
Administrative, Immigration, Discrimination
The Respondent had authorised immigration officers to act in a way which would otherwise be a discrimination against Tamils under the 1976 Act. They complained that authorisations had been effectively and unlawfully delegated. Held: The evaluations would in practice be carried out by individual immigration officers, and the decisions would be theirs. The authorisation therefore involved an improper delegation of the respondents powers. It was not justified as a legitimate way of achieving the respondents targets. A licence to discriminate should be expected to be subject to strict control, and parliament had intended that it be exercised by the respondent personally.
Race Relations Act 1976 19D - Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 1
[ Bailii ]
Murray, Regina (on the Application of) v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration [2002] EWCA Civ 1472
18 Oct 2002
CA
Administrative
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Association of British Civilian Internees Far East Region v Secretary of State for Defence [2002] EWHC 2119 (Admin)
18 Oct 2002
Admn
Administrative
Application for judicial review of grant of 10,000 to internees in the second world war.
[ Bailii ]
Pfizer Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health Times, 11 November 2002; Gazette, 16 January 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1566
6 Nov 2002
CA
Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Carnwath
Health, Administrative
The applicant appealed a refusal of a judicial review of the respondent's decision to restrict the prescription of their drug Viagra. They argued that under the transparency directive, the government was obliged to carry out a public process of comparing priorities. Held: The process of making this decision was one of allocating funds to competing needs and choosing priorities. That was essentially a political decision about the affordability of different remedies. It was not clear what sort of analysis might be given if ordered, and was not to be required as a pre-requisite of restricting prescription.
Council Directive 89/105/EEC the Transarency Directive Art 7
[ Bailii ]
Regina (H) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority Times, 25 November 2002; Gazette, 16 January 2003
11 Nov 2002
QBD
McCombe J
Human Rights, Administrative
The applicant claimed for damages having been injured. All the information requested by the Authority had been received, but the Authority unreasonably delayed settling the claim. The claimant sought damages under the Human Rights Act. Held: The correct approach would have been to seek an order requiring the Authority to make a decision within a certain time. The Authority had requested certain information which was irrelevant to its determination. The court ordered the Authority to make a determination within 28 days, and the Article 8 application was not to be pursued.
European Convention on Human Rights Art 8
Medway Council and Kent County Council, Essex County Council, Mead; Fossett v Secretary of State for Transport [2002] EWHC 2516 (Admn); [2003] JPL 583; [2002] 49 EG 123
26 Nov 2002
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay <
Administrative, Planning, Transport
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Farmer, Regina (on the Application of) v English Partnerships [2002] EWCA Civ 1873
11 Dec 2002
CA
Administrative
[ Bailii ]
The Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson Times, 02 January 2003; Gazette, 13 March 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1812
18 Dec 2002
CA
Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Waller, The President
Administrative, Human Rights
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.
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)
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 31 December 2002; Gazette, 13 March 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1882; [2003] QB 993
20 Dec 2002
CA
Schiemann, Rix, Pumfrey LJJ
Criminal Practice, Administrative
The applicant had been unlawfully taken from Zimbabwe, then tried and sentenced in the UK. His conviction was set aside as unsafe, but he had been refused damages. He appealed. Held: There was no substantial criticism of the trial itself, but the procedure under which he had been taken amounted to an abuse of process. The phrase 'miscarriage of justice' was wide enough to include acts of abuse, and therefore it was appropriate to compensate the applicant. Had Parliament wanted to displace the presumption of innocence, it would have needed to have said so.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 133
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Quintaville) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Times, 20 January 2003; [2002] EWHC 2785 (Admin)
20 Dec 2002
QBD
Maurice Kay, J
Health, Administrative
The applicant sought a judicial review of the respondent's issue of a licence for genetic screening. They claimed this was outside the statutory powers of the respondent. Held: The Act specifically allowed the Authority to issue licences which were for activities taking place in the course of treatment. The present licence would allow tissue typing, which was solely for the purpose of allowing to go forward a pregnancy which would produce a child with tissue compatible with an elder sibling. That could not be said to be necessary or desirable for the purpose of assisting a woman to carry a child.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 11
[ Bailii ]