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: 2001 To: 2001
This page lists 36 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Bindel [2001] Imm AR 1
2001
Sullivan J
Judicial Review
A women's group objected to the visit to the United Kingdom of Mike Tyson, a convicted rapist, so that he could earn money here by appearing in the boxing ring. Held: Justice for Women did not have arguable grounds for interfering with the Secretary of State's decision to grant Tyson a temporary visa to enter the country, not that they did not have a sufficient interest to bring the proceedings.
1 Citers
Regina (Vetterlein) -v- Hampshire County Council [2001] EWHC Admin 560
2001
Admn
Sullivan J
Human Rights, Licensing, Judicial Review
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 would be so directly effected by the incinerator proposal as to engage article 8, "The answer to that question has to be no, even if one strictly applies the WHO guideline, ignoring the fact that it is only a guideline and not a mandatory requirement, and that a breach of the guideline does not automatically mean that there is serious pollution, much less that there is any significant danger to health.
The claimant's is no more than a generalised concern as to the effects of the incinerator in terms of increased nitrogen dioxide emissions. Such generalised environmental concerns do not engage article 8, which is concerned with an individual's right to enjoy life in his own home."
Sulivan J considered the power of a court hearing an application for leave to bring judicial review proceedings to determine the issue immediately having heard the applications: "I am satisfied that all the arguments open to the claimants on matters of fact and law have been placed before the Court. In the circumstances it would be wholly artificial to consider the by now academic question: is the claimant's case arguable? Having heard the arguments I am in a position to determine the substantive application for judicial review on its merits."
1 Cites
1 Citers
Boxall -v- Waltham Forest Borough Council; 2001 - (2001) 4 CCLR 258
Regina (Tshikangu) -v- Newham London Borough Council; QBD 15-Feb-2001 - Times, 27 April 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 92
Regina (Tshikangu) -v- Newham London Borough Council; QBD 15-Feb-2001 - Times, 27 April 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 92
Regina -v- Flintshire County Council, Ex Parte Armstrong-Braun; CA 20-Feb-2001 - Times, 08 March 2001; [2001] BLGR 344; [2001] LGR 344; [2001] EWCA Civ 345; (2001) 3 LGLR 34
Allen -v- West Yorkshire Probation Service Times, 20 February 2001
20 Feb 2001
QBD
Judicial Review, Criminal Sentencing
Where a defendant felt that a sentence imposed by magistrates was wrong, he should take the issue to the Crown Court by way of appeal. It was wrong to try to deal with it by way of judicial review or appeal by way of case stated. As much as anything else the greater delay would lead to additional difficulties in carrying out any sentence.
Regina -v- Leicester Crown Court, ex parte Commissioners of Customs and Excise; QBD 23-Feb-2001 - Times, 23 February 2001
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Ex Parte Bulger Times, 07 March 2001; [2001] 3 All E R 449
7 Mar 2001
QBD
Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review
The family of a murder victim has no standing to intervene to challenge the tariff set for the sentence to be served by the youths convicted of the murder. They had been invited to state the impact of their son's death, but not the sentence to be served. Although the standing required for judicial review was now generally lower, the fact of having made representations did not give them any such standing. When fixing the tariff of sentence to be served by a youth, the court must look on each occasion also at questions of rehabilitation.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 44 - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 82A
1 Citers
Regina (Hirst) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 22 March 2001; Gazette, 03 May 2001; [2001] Prison Law Reports 147; [2001] EWCA Civ 378
8 Mar 2001
CA
Lord Woolf C.J
Judicial Review, Criminal Sentencing, Prisons
The prisoner had been re-categorised and transferred to a higher category prison. Held: A life sentence serving prisoner, who had served the tariff period, and was moving into the period of discretionary detention, was entitled to be informed of a change of his category, and the reasons for it, and be given opportunity to make representations about it. This would not prevent a move for operational reasons not involving such a change in category. Such a change of category would significantly affect his chances of release. Lord Woolf: "I have found the question of what should be the outcome of this appeal by no means easy to determine. I accept the importance of the prison service being able to make decisions which are operationally important without having to go through the technical requirements of providing opportunities for making representations. However, the rules of fairness and natural justice are flexible and not static; they are capable of developing not only in relation to the expectations of contemporary society, but also to meet proper operational requirements. The ability of the prison service to meet both their operational needs and the needs for prisoners to be treated fairly can usually be achieved within the panoply of the requirements of fairness. On the whole, the courts will require considerable persuasion that administrative convenience justifies a departure from the principles of fairness which would otherwise be appropriate in a particular situation. However, the arguments which are advanced by the Home Office in this case, as I understand them, are not only ones of administrative convenience. They refer to operational difficulties and operational problems which could undermine the security and discipline within the prison system.
It seems to me basic that a decision which is as important as the present decision to Mr Hirst should not be taken without giving him the opportunity to make representations and to have the matter properly considered as a consequence of his so doing. I think that there is some substance, but would not overvalue it, in the problem referred to by Lord Justice Simon Brown which arise in reconsidering a decision [paragraph 58 above]. However, regardless of that difficulty, it seems to me that a decision of this nature as a matter of fairness should not be taken until Mr Hirst had been fully involved. He should have been given a reasonable period to make representations before the decision was taken. He should have been given that opportunity after he had been told the grounds upon which it was appropriate to recategorise him.'"
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Bedfordshire County Council ex parte Henlow Grange Health Farm Ltd Gazette, 22 March 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 179
13 Mar 2001
Admn
Planning, Judicial Review
The applicant owned a health farm. Permission was sought to develop adjoining land, and the applicant objected unsuccessfully, but the Secretary of State then called in the decision. In the meantime, the applicant sought judicial review of the council's decision, saying that the council had given weight to an irrelevant matter. The application failed. The planning system provided a comprehensive code for such challenges, and it should be used. Judicial review would exclude the public from involvement. The issues were as to matters of fact which were appropriate for assessment within the system.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 77
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Commissioners of Customs and Excise Ex Greater Manchester Police Times, 13 March 2001
13 Mar 2001
CA
VAT, Police, Judicial Review
The police authority purchased new cars, and sought to reclaim the VAT paid. The case was brought by judicial review because no appeal lay against the refusal of the Commissioners to allow this. A government scheme was intended to allow publicly funded bodies to make reclaims of VAT notwithstanding that they were not registered for VAT. Since VAT registered bodies could not either make this particular reclaim on new car purchases. The scheme which blocked refund on certain items prevailed.
Value Added Tax (Input Tax) Order 1992 (1992 No 3222)
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Education and Employment ex parte Liverpool Hope University College [2001] EWCA Civ 362
15 Mar 2001
CA
Education, Judicial Review
The college sought judicial review of regulations which precluded it from using in its title the name 'university' pending a appropriate order made in the Privy Council. The two name changes within a short period would cause great loss. The conditions which would have allowed non-interruption were impossible to meet. Reference was made to parliamentary materials to see the basis of the regulations issued. The prohibition was to follow the procedure for approval after a reasonable time. The appellant argued that there was a substantive unfairness, even though there was no legitimate expectation created, but the test was still strict, and had not been met.
Further and Higher Education Act 1982 77 - Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 39
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Balbo B and C Auto Transporti Internazionali Gazette, 11 May 2001; Times, 22 March 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 195
22 Mar 2001
Admn
Judicial Review, Immigration, Transport
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.
Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 34
[ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Lichfield District Council and Another; Ex Parte Lichfield Securities Ltd Times, 30 March 2001; Gazette, 26 April 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 304
30 Mar 2001
CA
Judicial Review, Litigation Practice, Planning
The rules required a judge at trial on a judicial review case to consider the issue of whether there had been any undue delay in bringing the case. Nevertheless, where this issue had already been fully argued at a preliminary hearing, the judge could properly exclude a further attempt to argue the point. The judge's duties as case manager required him to consider whether new material was to be introduced, or a different aspect was to be put, some relevant matter had been overlooked by the first judge, or he had said that it might be reconsidered at trial.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Stevens, Regina (on the Application of) Lewes District Council [2001] EWCA Civ 542
4 Apr 2001
CA
Simon Brown LJ, VP
Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Guleed -v- Regina [2001] EWCA Civ 540
11 Apr 2001
CA
Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Gavira) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 15 May 2001
15 May 2001
QBD
Immigration, Judicial Review
The procedure whereby the Secretary of State could certify that an asylum seeker's claim did not disclose a valid ground, did not allow the Secretary to issue a certificate which depended upon a denial of the truth of the applicant's claim. Where the claim asserted that the asylum-seeker had a fear of prosecution based upon facts which, if true, would bring her claim within the United Nations Convention, was a claim showing a fear of prosecution. The use of the procedure relying upon the disbelief of the applicant was quite unreasonable.
Regina (Daly) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department; HL 23-May-2001 - Times, 25 May 2001; Gazette, 21 June 2001; [2001] 3 All ER 433; [2001] 1 AC 532; [2001] 2 WLR 1622; [2001] UKHL 26
Regina (A) -v- Lambeth London Borough Council Times, 03 July 2001; CO/3698/2000; (2001) LGR 513
25 May 2001
QBD
Baker
Children, Local Government, Judicial Review
The duty imposed by section 17 of the Act on local authorities to safeguard and promote the welfare of children is a general duty only, and is not capable of being enforced for the benefit of a particular child by way of judicial review. As a so called target duty decisions made by the local authority pursuant to it were not open to challenge by review. Other sections may give rise to specific duties which might be so challenged, but not the general obligation.
courtcommentary.com Duty placed on social services authority under Children Act 1989 s17 is a target duty owed to children in general and not justiciable by judicial review - no duty in law to meet assessed needs by providing alternative accommodation for the whole family
Children Act 1989 17 20
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ courtcommentary.com ]
Regina (on the Application of Elizabeth Heather; Martin Ward; Hilary Callin) -v- The Leonard Cheshire Foundation and H M Attorney General; Admn 15-Jun-2001 - [2001] EWHC Admin 429
Regina (Ben-Abdelaziz) -v- Haringey London Borough Council and Another; CA 19-Jun-2001 - Times, 19 June 2001
Regina (Ben-Abdelaziz) -v- Haringey London Borough Council and Another Gazette, 21 June 2001
21 Jun 2001
CA
Judicial Review, Human Rights, Damages
The claimant asserted that judicial proceedings, since they were conducted in the name of the Crown, were brought 'by or at the instigation' of a public authority, and that acts so challenged were therefore subject to the Act, even though they had taken place before the Act came into effect. The assertion was unsustainable. The Crown's involvement was nominal only, and in reality the proceedings were instigated by the claimants. The acts complained of were not therefore those of a public authority. The Supreme Court Act also precluded a claim.
Human Rights Act 1998 7, 22 (4) - Supreme Court Act 1981 31(4)
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Education and Employment ex parte Amraf Training plc Times, 28 June 2001
28 Jun 2001
CA
Litigation Practice, Administrative, Judicial Review
On a complaint in public law, if a party wishes to raise allegations of victimisation in the nature of malice, ill will, or undisclosed ulterior motive, in the course of proceedings, these matters had to be raised clearly and explicitly. It was inappropriate to raise such issues clearly only on appeal. Here the judge could not be criticised for taking the evidence as it was presented to him. Evidence as to victimisation introduced only at that later stage would not be admitted.
Samaroo and Sezek -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department; CA 17-Jul-2001 - Times, 20 June 2001; Gazette, 09 August 2001; Gazette, 06 September 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 795; [2001] EWCA Civ 1139; [2002] 1 WLR 348; [2001] UKHRR 1150; [2002] INLR 55
W & L -v- The Governors of B School & The Governors of J School Times, 20 August 2001; [2001] EWCA Civ 1199; [2001] LGR 561
24 Jul 2001
CA
Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Thorpe
Judicial Review, Education
Just how a teacher re-incorporated a child within school, after he had first been excluded, but then re-instated by the independent appeal panel, was a matter for the head-teacher, provided only that he could not do so in any way which reflected a conclusion different to that of the panel. This may involve the use of other arrangements. The panel's decision did not require a return to the status quo ante, but only that he be no longer excluded. The headmaster's discretion was his general discretion, and not just that exercised under the Act.
School Standards and Framework Act 1998 67(3)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of Anna Ford -v- The Press Complaints Commission [2001] EWHC Admin 683
31 Jul 2001
Admn
The Honourable Mr. Justice Sibler
Media, Information, Judicial Review, Human Rights, Administrative
The complainant had been photographed wearing a bikini, whilst on holiday by a photographer using a long lens. She had been on a quiet part of public beach. She complained to the Press Complaints Commission who rejected her complaint. The rules required press not to use such tactics when the subject was on private property, and the definition of that included a place where there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. The commission found it to be a public place. She sought to review their decision. The commission that it exercised a public function under the Act. On judicial review, the court was not to substitute its own decision for that of the executive. The human rights law might now require a more intensive review, when considering the proportionality of any interference with the subject's rights of privacy. Nevertheless, the English courts will continue to defer to the views of bodies like the Commission even after the HRA. In this case also there had been a delay in applying for the review, and the application for leave to review was dismissed.
Code of Practice of the Press Complaints Commission - Human Rights Act 1998 6
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Leach) -v- Commissioner for Local Administration; QBD 2-Aug-2001 - Times, 02 August 2001; [2001] EWHC Admin 445
Farrakhan -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department; QBD 1-Oct-2001 - [2001] EWHC Admin 781
Hatton and Others -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 2-Oct-2001 - 36022/97; Times, 08 October 2001; [2001] ECHR 561; [2003] ECHR 338; (2003) 37 EHRR 611; [2001] ECHR 565; [2000] ECHR 709
Regina (on the Application of Chorion Plc) -v- Westminster City Council [2001] EWHC Admin 754
5 Oct 2001
Admn
Judicial Review, Licensing
A licensing policy had been challenged and then amended by the defendant council to meet the claimant's concerns. Though the remaining issue was as to costs; the judge had to decide whether the challenge had been well founded. Held: The policy had the meaning contended for by the claimant, even though that had not been the meaning intended by the defendant council, and: "I also accept Mr Hunter's [counsel for the claimant] submission that publishing a policy that meant something other than what was intended rendered that policy susceptible to judicial review. Policies are a means of promoting consistency while not fettering the discretion of a public body . . "
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina (on the Application of Bateman) -v- Legal Services Commission [2001] EWHC Admin 797
22 Oct 2001
Admn
Judicial Review
The court emphasised the need for applicants for judicial review to review the merits of their case
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Barker, Regina (on the Application of) -v- London Borough of Bromley [2001] EWCA Civ 1766; [2002] Env LR 631; [2002] Env LR 25; [2001] 49 EGCS 117; [2001] NPC 170; [2002] 2 P & CR 8
23 Nov 2001
CA
Brooke, Latham LJJ, Burton J
Planning, Judicial Review
The court considered when time began to run for an application for judicial review where the question arose in the context of an outline planning permission granted subject to the approval of reserved matters.
The claimant challenged proposed development of the Crystal Palace site.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Dougnath Rajkumar -v- Kenneth Lalla, Henley Wooding, Corinre Mohammed, Carlyle Walters, Samal Seemungal, (Members of the Public Service Commission) and Cipriani Baptiste (The Commissioner of Prisons) Appeal No 1 of 2001; [2001] UKPC 53
29 Nov 2001
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Sir Andrew Leggatt
Administrative, Employment, Judicial Review, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant complained that he had not been treated fairly as a civil servant in having been passed over for promotion. He sought to appeal a finding on judicial review. Held: While some proceedings for judicial review require more elaborate procedures, it is in no sense an optional procedure to be contrasted with some more formal procedure, and no leave is required from a final order in such proceedings. The appellant had been an acting Prison Officer grade II for ten years. The decision of the judge was in error, but the committee could not order his appointment. The case was remitted for the Civil Service Commission for their active consideration, and in the absence of a positive decision, full reasons were to be given.
1 Cites
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
Mahon, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Taunton County Court; Admn 13-Dec-2001 - [2001] EWHC Admin 1078
Matthew Joseph Langton Denley George Allen, Regina (on the Application of Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another) [2001] EWHC Admin 1047
17 Dec 2001
Admn
Mr Nigel Pleming Q. C. (Sitting As A Deputy High Court Judge
Agriculture, Animals, Human Rights, Judicial Review, Administrative
The claimants were farmers, who had been made subject to orders under the Act. They had accumulated maggot waste on their land. The second defendant accepted that the waste included material which would be high risk under the Directive. The defendant had entered the claimant's land to execute works required under the notice, and the claimant argued this interfered with their property rights under the Convention. The maggot waste which had been supplied to him had included other animal wastes. Held: Neither the Act for the Order allowed any provision for an appeal. Was judicial review a sufficient alternative remedy? Some of the significant decisions predated the Human Rights Act, and the actual procedure adopted allowed representations to be made, and for review if necessary. The Act was compliant.
Animal Health Act 1981 - Animal By-Products Order 1999 - European Convention on Human Rights - Council Directive 90/667/EEC of 27th November 1990.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
