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.
Judicial Review - From: 2000 To: 2000
This page lists 31 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.
Rape Crisis Centre -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department; 2000 - 2000 SC 527
Sunworld Limited -v- Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council [2000] 1 WLR 2102; [1999] EWHC QB 271
2000
QBD
Simon Brown LJ, Turner J
Litigation Practice, Judicial Review
The company faced a prosecution under the 1968 Act, in respect of a brochure. On conviction, the company asked the Crown Court to state a case for the Divisional Court. The Recorder refused as to two points, saying that they were decisions of fact not law. The company sought judicial review for mandamus to require the case to be stated. Held: The court heard an appeal which should have been brought by way of judicial review. The court gave the necessary directions, and proceeded to treat the hearing as such an application.
Simon Brown LJ suggested the appropriate practice: "(1) Where a court, be it a Magistrates' Court or a Crown Court, refuses to state a case, then the party aggrieved should without delay apply for permission to bring judicial review, either (a) to mandamus it to state a case and/or (b) to quash the order sought to be appealed.
(2) If the court below has already (a) given a reasoned judgment containing all the necessary findings of fact and/or (b) explained its refusal to state a case in terms which clearly raise the true point of law in issue, then the correct course would be for the single judge, assuming he thinks the point properly arguable, to grant permission for judicial review which directly challenges the order complained of, thereby avoiding the need for a case to be stated at all.
(3) If the court below has stated a case but in respect of some questions only, as here, the better course may be to apply for the case stated to be amended unless again, as here, there already exists sufficient material to enable the Divisional Court to deal with all the properly arguable issues in the case.
(4) This court for its part will adopt whatever course involves the fewest additional steps and the least expense, delay and duplication of proceedings. Whether, as in Ex Parte Levy, it will be possible to proceed at once to a substantive determination of the issues must inevitably depend in part upon whether all interested parties are represented and prepared, and in part upon the availability of court time."
Trade Descriptions Act 1968 14(1)(b)(ii)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex Parte Thomson Holidays Ltd Times, 12 January 2000
12 Jan 2000
CA
Judicial Review, Commercial, Consumer
Regulations made by the Secretary of State which purported to restrict the range of contracts which could be made between tour operators and travel agents were beyond his powers. The ability to make such regulations followed directly only from a report prepared by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, and in this case the regulations went beyond the findings, and were to that extent ultra vires.
Fair Trading Act 1973 56(2) - Foreign Package Holidays (Tour Operators and Travel Agents) Order 1998 (1998 N0 1945)
Regina -v- Muntham House School, Ex Parte R Times, 26 January 2000
26 Jan 2000
QBD
Judicial Review, Education
It was not possible to judicially review the admission policy of a private school. It was a private body, even though it received the bulk of its income from local authorities, and it was otherwise subject to strict statutory control.
Hardie -v- Edinburgh City Council; OHCS 16-Feb-2000 - Times, 16 February 2000
Regina -v- Regional Office of the Employment Tribunals (London North), Ex p Sojorin (unreported) Unreported, 21 February 2000
21 Feb 2000
CA
Sedley LJ
Employment, Judicial Review
The Employment Appeal Tribunal is immune from judicial review.
1 Citers
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Shaw Times, 16 March 2000
16 Mar 2000
QBD
Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review
A prisoner was subject to a discretionary life imprisonment order. To try to accelerate his release he applied to take part in a program for the rehabilitation of sex offenders. Before that decision was made, he was reclassified as a psychopath, and then refused entry to the program. He sought to review that decision, because he had not been given opportunity to make representations about it. The decision was part of a continuing review of the prisoner, and the effect on his potential early release, whilst real, remained a secondary consequence.
Regina -v- North West Leicestershire District Council East Midlands International Airport Ltd ex parte Moses [2000] EWCA Civ 125
12 Apr 2000
CA
Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- North West Leicestershire District Council and Another, Ex Parte Moses Gazette, 28 April 2000
28 Apr 2000
CA
Planning, Judicial Review
The authority granted approval of an extension of the airport runway in 1994, but on a later application required an environmental impact assessment. That was provided, and dealt with the impact of both extensions. The applicant sought judicial review of the first approval. He argued that the delay was overborne by the importance now attached to such procedures. Held: The application for review was refused. The considerable delay had allowed many millions of pounds to be spent, and further money would be spent taking down what had been built.
Supreme Court Act 1981 31(6)
1 Cites
Regina -v- Servite Houses, London Borough of Wandsworth Council ex parte Louisa Laura Goldsmith, By Her Daughter and Litigation Friend Linda Goldsmith -v- Florence Nellie Chatting By Her Niece and Litigation Friend Marlene Turner [2000] EWHC Admin 338; [2001] LGR 55
12 May 2000
Admn
Moses J
Judicial Review
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ex Parte Manning, Ex Parte Melbourne; QBD 17-May-2000 - [2000] EWHC Admin 342; [2001] 1 QB 330; [2000] Inquest LR 133; [2000] Po LR 172; [2001] HRLR 3; [2000] 3 WLR 463; [2000] EWHC 562 (QB); [2001] QB 330
Steed -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department; HL 26-May-2000 - Times, 26 May 2000; Gazette, 08 June 2000; [2000] UKHL 32; [2000] 3 All ER 226; [2000] 1 WLR 1169
Regina -v- Director General of Electricity Supply, Ex Parte London Electricity Plc Times, 13 June 2000
13 Jun 2000
QBD
Administrative, Judicial Review
Where the cost of upgrading supply systems in order to support large numbers of newly installed night storage systems fell to be apportioned, the test as to who should bear the burden was according to causation. An increase under twenty five per cent would not have occasioned a charge, and individually no one supply exceeded that amount, but the Director must look to the whole scheme. For one identifiable scheme it was unrealistic to break it back down into individual increments in demand.
Asifa Saleem -v- Secretary of State for Home Department Times, 22 June 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 186; [2001] 1 WLR 443
13 Jun 2000
CA
Lord Justice Roch, Lord Justice Mummery and Lady Justice Hale
Judicial Review, Immigration, Human Rights
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.
Immigration Act 1971 - Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996 2070 - European Convention on Human Rights 6
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Ryan and Another -v- Friction Dynamics Ltd and others Times, 14 June 2000
14 Jun 2000
ChD
Litigation Practice, Judicial Review
When granting asset freezing orders in support of proceedings in a foreign jurisdiction the court should exercise caution, particularly under the section since the court would not have full knowledge of the issues. Where good grounds existed, and comity required a court to grant an order, the requirements of risk of dissipation, and of a good case must be met; an order might be made even if refused by a foreign court, and the existence of a world-wide order already did not prevent an English court granting a local order.
Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 25
Toth & Another, Regina (On The Application of) -v- General Medical Council [2000] 1 WLR 2209; [2000] EWHC Admin 361
23 Jun 2000
Admn
Lightman J
Health Professions, Judicial Review
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."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Ex parte Challenger Times, 11 July 2000
11 Jul 2000
QBD
Judicial Review, Human Rights
An order was due to come into effect, and there was to be a public enquiry. The applicants sought review of the decision not to provide legal assistance for local objectors, on the grounds that it would prejudice their rights under the Human Rights Act, alleging breach of their rights to a fair trial by inequality of arms.. The court held that it would not be correct to allow a judicial review to give current effect to an Act which itself had not yet come into effect.
Regina -v- Vale of Glamorgan Council, Ex Parte Clements and Others; CA 22-Aug-2000 - Times, 22 August 2000
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Al-Fayed Times, 07 September 2000
7 Sep 2000
CA
Immigration, Judicial Review, Media
A newspaper report written by a journalist quoting an unnamed if reliable source as to words spoken by the Secretary of State was insufficient to found the serious allegation that the Secretary had prejudged the applicant's application for naturalisation. The report suffered three defects. The source was unnamed, the reporter was himself quoting a party who had not heard the words himself, and the context in which the words had been spoken was unclear. Even had they been established, the words alleged would be insufficient to support the alleged pre-judgement.
Regina -v- South Bank University, Ex Parte Coggeran; CA 19-Sep-2000 - Times, 19 September 2000; Gazette, 19 October 2000
Regina -v- The National Lottery Commission ex parte Camelot Group Plc; Admn 21-Sep-2000 - Times, 12 October 2000; [2001] EMLR 3; [2000] EWHC Admin 391
The Queen on the Application of Roda Guleed -v- the London Borough of Barnet [2000] EWHC Admin 5
9 Oct 2000
Admn
Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- B (Extradition: Abuse of Process) Times, 17 October 2000
17 Oct 2000
CACD
Extradition, Human Rights, Judicial Review
An allegation of abuse of process did not constitute a special category of extradition to allow a judicial review of a decision not to grant a stay of those extradition proceedings. Article 8 could not be used to restrict such decisions. In any event the issues relating to the way in which the applicant had come to be brought within the jurisdiction, and the non-disclosure he alleged had been fully argued and considered on appeal already and rejected.
Regina -v- Islington London Borough Council, ex parte G A (a Child) Times, 20 October 2000; [2000] EWHC Admin 390
20 Oct 2000
Admn
Jack Heatson QC
Education, Judicial Review
The child was severely disabled and was to be schooled as a weekday boarder 75 miles from home. He sought assistance with the travelling expenses when his condition worsened and the arrangements became more burdensome. Held: It was not open to a local authority to refuse to contribute to a child's travelling expenses to a school named in his statement, on the basis that he might attend another school nearby which was not named as appropriate in his statement of special educational needs, or to make attendance conditional upon an agreement regarding payment by the parents of travelling expenses. The council's decision was Wednesbury unreasonable since they had failed to consider the changes in the child's transport needs since the statement was made, and the parents' financial circumstances. Any bar to a judicial review operated against the parents not the child. "the matter must go back to the authority which must reconsider its decision giving proper consideration to all the changes of circumstances and not taking into account of its belief that G.A.'s needs could be met at a local school not named in the statement."
Education Act 1996 324(5)(a)(ii), 19 509
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Chief Constables of C and D, Ex Parte A; QBD 7-Nov-2000 - Times, 07 November 2000
Kingsley -v- The United Kingdom Times, 09 January 2001; (2001) 33 EHRR 288; [2000] ECHR 526; 35605/97; [2000] ECHR 528
7 Nov 2000
ECHR
Human Rights, Judicial Review
The judicial review procedure which restricted the matters which it considered so as to exclude consideration of the allegation by the applicant that the tribunal whose decision he challenged had not been impartial, was insufficient to support the provision of a fair trial. This amounted to a lack of control over that tribunal by a judicial body with full jurisdiction. To satisfy that requirement, the reviewing court needed the power to set aside the decision and to order that it be reheard by such an impartial tribunal.
Human Rights Act 1998 - European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex Parte Eastaway; HL 8-Nov-2000 - Times, 08 November 2000; Gazette, 30 November 2000; [2000] UKHL 56; [2000] 1 WLR 2222; [2000] 1 All ER 27
Regina -v- Bolsover District Council, ex parte Pepper; QBD 15-Nov-2000 - Times, 15 November 2000
Regina -v- The Department of Trade and Industry, ex parte Alba Radio Limited, Pifco Limted; Admn 30-Nov-2000 - [2000] EWHC Admin 423
Robert and Sonia Burkett, Application for Permission To Apply for Judicial Review [2000] EWCA Civ 321
13 Dec 2000
CA
Judicial Review
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- The Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Samaroo [2000] EWHC Admin 435
20 Dec 2000
Admn
Thomas J
Immigration, Judicial Review
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
