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: 2003 To: 2003
This page lists 26 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.
Regina (Tucker) -v- Director General of the National Crime Squad Times, 27 January 2003; Gazette, 13 March 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 57; [2003] ICR 599; [2003] IRLR 439; [2003] Po LR 9; [2003] ACD 37
17 Jan 2003
CA
Aldous, Scott Baker LJJ, Sir Philip Otton
Police, Judicial Review
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 request for judicial review. Held: The appeal failed. Operational matters within the police service, save disciplinary matters were exempt from judicial review. The squad was a creation of statute, and it is a public body, but that was not enough to make what was a managerial decision, of sufficient public law concern to allow a judicial review. He had not been disciplined, and the appointment was one which would come to an end anyway. "The Deputy Director General in sending the Appellant back to his force was not performing a public duty owed to him. The decision taken in relation to the Appellant was specific to him. Other officers were dealt with differently. Some were arrested; some were sent back to be disciplined; one was retained with different duties. But the Appellant was simply sent back. It was a decision tailor-made to him. It was taken because of perceived deficiencies in his skills and conduct as an NCS officer. It was an operational decision taken because it was decided that he fell short of the particular requirements that were necessary to work in the NCS. It had nothing to do with his private life and I reject Mr Westgate's contention that Article 8 of the ECHR was engaged. "
Police Act 1997 48 55
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Dwr Cymru Cyfyngedig) -v- Environment Agency of Wales Times, 29 April 2003; Gazette, 24 April 2003
28 Feb 2003
QBD
Harrison
Judicial Review
On seeking a judicial review of the defendant's decision, the claimant sought to bring in new evidence which would show that the factual basis on which the decision had been made was incorrect. Held: Great caution should be exercised before admitting on an application for judicial review evidence which had not been available to the decision maker. There were difficulties either way. Although the law of judicial review had moved on since Powis, the case remained good law, and the evidence should not be admitted.
1 Cites
McWhirter and Gouriet, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2003] EWCA Civ 384
5 Mar 2003
CA
Laws LJ
Constitutional, Judicial Review
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 Secretary of State that "ratification is a step taken on the international plane, and is not governed by domestic law nor operative at the level of domestic law."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of Frederick Tagoe-Thompson -v- the Hospital Managers of the Park Royal Centre [2003] EWCA Civ 330; Times, 18 April 2003
12 Mar 2003
CA
The Hon Mrs Justice Arden Dbe Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Pill
Judicial Review, Health
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.
Mental Health Act 1983 3
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Haggerty and others) -v- St Helens Borough Council Times, 30 April 2003
8 Apr 2003
QBD
Judicial Review, Local Government
The claimants were residents in a private nursing home. As a result of the respondent's failure to increase fees, the home would have to close. They sought a review of the respondent's decision saying that it would infringe their rights to private and family life. Held: Applying Pretty, the court should give public authorities a wide area of discretion in finding a balance between the interests of the community and of an individual. The financial resources of the respondent were a proper consideration, and they were entitled to a substantial deference. The challenge failed.
1 Cites
Gjini, Regina (on the Application of) -v- London Borough of Islington [2003] EWCA Civ 558
15 Apr 2003
CA
The Vice-Chancellor, Lord Justice Clarke and Lord Justice Kay
Benefits, Immigration, Judicial Review
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 facts underlying her case. Since the case had begun, the Coucil had reviewed its policies and uprated the benefits payable. The evidence placed before the court as to the various benefits rates and calculations was weak. It was not possible to say that the method of calculation used by the Council was irrational or inaccurate, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Asylum Support (Interim Provisions) Regulations 1999 6
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
In re M (Care Proceedings: Judicial Review); In the matter of unborn baby M R; X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Gloucestershire County Council [2003] 2 FLR 171; [2003] EWHC 850 (Admin)
15 Apr 2003
Admn
Munby J
Children, Judicial Review
Munby J: "If a baby is to be removed from its mother, one would normally expect arrangements to be made by the local authority to facilitate contact on a regular basis . . . Those arrangements must be driven by the needs of the family, not stunted by lack of resources. Typically, if this is what the parents want, one will be looking to contact most days of the week and for lengthy periods."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Idubo, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 1203
14 May 2003
CA
Immigration, Judicial Review
Application to renew application for judicial review.
[ Bailii ]
Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Hammersmith and Fulham Gazette, 29 May 2003; [2003] EWHC 1031 (Admin)
15 May 2003
Admn
Mr Justice Newman
Planning, Judicial Review
Outline permission was granted for a large development, reserving certain matters. The applicant challenged the permission saying that the application had not included the information required under the Regulations, and the authority had failed to make the statement to say what had been considered. Held: At the outline application stage, the plan had to provide sufficient information as to its environmental impact, but for the authority to judge whether it had received sufficient information. Though that assessment was subject to judicial review, it was a question of fact and degree. The challenge amounted to a claim in effect that almost nothing could be reserved, and was dismissed. The failure to make the statement was real but not substantial.
Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 4(2)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
The Confederation of Passenger Transport UK -v- The Humber Bridge Board and the Secretary of State for Transport Local Government and the Regions; CA 25-Jun-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1842; [2004] QB 310; Times, 16 July 2003
Regina (Smith, Trevor) -v- Parole Board Times, 09 July 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1014; [2003] 1 WLR 2176
30 Jun 2003
CA
Woolf LCJ, Auld, Clarke LJJ
Civil Procedure Rules, Judicial Review
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. .
Civil Procedure Rules 54.15
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Garden and Leisure Group Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) -v- North Somerset Council and Another [2003] EWHC 1605 (Admin)
4 Jul 2003
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Richards
Planning, Judicial Review
The claimant garden centre sought to challenge a relaxation on planning restrictions over a competing centre. Held: The section 106 agreemnent was to be looked at to see what purpose was served by the original conditions. Section 106A(6) does not require that the obligation continues to serve its original purpose. What matters is whether the obligation continues to serve a useful purpose. The members had not properly considered what purpose had been served, or looked at the suggested terms as a whole. The application was not premature since the faults were probably incapable of correction otherwise.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 106 106A
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Hampshire County Council -v- Beer (T/A Hammer Trout Farm); Regina (Beer) -v- Hampshire Farmers' Market Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1056; Times, 25 August 2003; [2004] 1 WLR 233
21 Jul 2003
CA
Lord Justice Dyson, Lord Justice Longmore and Sir Martin Nourse
Local Government, Licensing, Judicial Review
The applicant had been refused a licence to operate within the farmer's market. It sought judicial review of the rejection, but the respondent argued that it was a private company not susceptible to review. Held: The decisions of the Farmers Market were open to judicial review. The farmers markets were held on publicly owned land to which the public had access, the company was set up by the council using statutory powers and it stepped into the council's shoes performing the same functions as the council had previously performed. From the start the council assisted the company by providing facilities and finance. The company was established to take over on a non profit basis the running of markets previously operated by the council in the exercise of its statutory power in what was considered to be the public interest. In that light, the company having taken over a public function, retained a sufficient element of the exercise of a public function to make its decisions susceptible to judicial review: "unless the source of power clearly provides the answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law."
Dyson LJ said: "It seems to me that the law has now been developed to the point where, unless the source of power clearly provides an answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law. It may be said with some justification that this criterion for amenability is very broad, not to say question-begging. But it provides the framework for the investigation that has to be conducted. There is a growing body of case law in which the question of amenability to judicial review has been considered. From these cases it is possible to identify a number of features which point towards the presence or absence of the requisite public law element".
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
I-CD Publishing Ltd -v- The Secretary of State, The Information Commissioner (Interested Party) [2003] EWHC 1761 (Admin); Times, 11 August 2003
21 Jul 2003
QBD
The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay
Elections, Judicial Review
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.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Bhamjee -v- Forsdick and Others (No 2); CA 25-Jul-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1113; Times, 31 July 2003; [2004] 1 WLR 88
Davies and others -v- Financial Services Authority [2003] EWCA Civ 1128; Times, 06 October 2003; Gazette, 02 October 2003
30 Jul 2003
CA
Kennedy, Mummery, Carnwath LJJ
Judicial Review, Financial Services
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.
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000
[ Bailii ]
Moyna -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; HL 31-Jul-2003 - [2003] 4 All ER 162; (2003) 73 BMLR 201; [2003] UKHL 44; Times, 11 August 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1929
Gatwick Express, Regina (on the Application Of) -v- Central Arbitration Committee [2003] EWHC 2035 (Admin)
11 Aug 2003
Admn
Employment, Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Mount Cook Land Ltd and Another -v- Westminster City Council; CA 14-Oct-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1346; Times, 16 October 2003; [2004] 1 PLR 29; [2004] 2 P&CR 22
Jones, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Mansfield District Council and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1408; Times, 31 October 2003
16 Oct 2003
CA
Lord Justice Laws Ord Justice Dyson And Lord Justice Carnwath
Planning, Environment, Judicial Review
Plannning permission was sought. Objectors said that it would have such an impact that an environmental impact assessment was required. They now sought judicial review of the decision to proceed without one. Held: The judge had explained the approach correctly, and the role of the court is to conduct a Wednesbury review of the decision of the council. That review was also correct. It was not a Gillespie case. The committee already had substantial information before it. A planning authority could not rely upon undertakings and conditions to secure compliance with the requirements for an assessment.
Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 - Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 17 June 1995 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of Feakins -v- Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2003] EWCA Civ 1546; Times, 07 November 2003; Gazette, 02 January 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1761
4 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson
Agriculture, Environment, Judicial Review
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."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of Prison Officers' Association -v- the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWHC 2662 (Admin)
10 Nov 2003
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Newman
Employment, Judicial Review
The applicant trades union complained that the employer had failed to consult it before introducing new policies which had effect of breaching a legally binding agreement with the Association. Held: The existing agreement provided for any dispute to be referred to arbitration. That had not occurred, and the judicial review was refused.
Cheltenham Builders Ltd , Regina (on the Application of) -v- South Gloucestershire District Council [2003] EWHC 2803 (Admin); [2004] JPL 975
10 Nov 2003
Admn
Sullivan J
Land, Judicial Review
A claim was made for the review of a decision of the Council to amend the Register of Town and Village Greens (TVG). Held: The registration of the TVG was manifestly flawed and could not stand whether under section 14 or by way of judicial review. Available procedures did not enable precisely the same relief to be granted in that judicial review would enable the registration itself to be quashed. Judicial review was still available. There was no question of bypassing the statutory scheme; s.14 did not require permission to be obtained and there were no specific time limits. The date was that of the determination of the application by the registration authority or judgment by the court. That would enable the landowner in all cases to defeat a claim to the existence of a Green by placing a notice in appropriate terms on the land in question after the application has been made or proceedings commenced and before the determination or judgment and accordingly frustrate the purpose of the legislation. In some cases fairness would make an oral hearing not merely an option but a necessity.
Sullivan J considered the concept of 'locality' in this context, finding: 1) The word locality in section 22(1A) should be construed as having the same meaning in classes a, b and c; 2) Apart from the doubt expressed by Lord Denning MR in the New Windsor case, the authorities were unanimously to the effect that, at common law, a customary right to indulge in lawful sports and pastimes could exist only for the benefit of some legally recognised administrative division of the county, and that that was the sense in which Parliament used the word locality when defining class b and c village greens in 1965; 3) On any other approach, there would be no practical distinction between a locality and a neighbourhood; 4) Parliament's belief that the burden placed upon applicants for TVG registration to demonstrate that the users were the inhabitants of any locality was unduly onerous and should be lightened by the introduction of the neighbourhood concept, was entirely in accordance with the (almost) unanimous view expressed in the authorities; 5) A neighbourhood need not be a recognised administrative unit. A neighbourhood must have a sufficient degree of cohesiveness; 6) A locality in the case of class a and class b village greens means an administrative unit, not one or more administrative units, and locality has the same meaning in subsection; 7) When enacting the 2000 Act, Parliament had not intended to create additional obstacles for applicants, but it managed to do so.
Commons Registration Act 1965 14 22(1A)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina (on the Application of Dudson) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice [2003] EWHC 2797 (Admin); Times, 27 November 2003
21 Nov 2003
Admn
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Mackay
Criminal Sentencing, Judicial Review, Human Rights
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, the LCJ was acting in a judicial capacity, and therefore his recommendation was not subject to judicial review. "Article 6.1 may require an appellate court conducting an appeal against a sentence to afford the appellant an oral hearing, and perhaps occasionally to give or lead evidence at that hearing, if on the facts of his case and the issues arising in it such a step is necessary to ensure that the procedure is fair." In this case it was not. The Lord Chief Justice had been under no obligation to afford the appellant an oral hearing and, alternatively, that, if he was entitled to an oral hearing, he had waived that entitlement. The Lord Chief Justice had paid due regard to the appellant's welfare.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 53(1) - European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Unitymark Ltd , Regina (on the Application of) -v- Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs [2003] EWHC 2748 (Admin)
21 Nov 2003
Admn
Agriculture, European, Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd, (Regina on the Application of ) -v- Serious Fraud Office and Another [2003] EWHC 3002 (Admin); Times, 06 January 2004
17 Dec 2003
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay
Police, Criminal Practice, Judicial Review, Human Rights
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to disclose documents obtained by it from them during an investigation. Held: The decisions to disclose material to the DoH were "in accordance with law" within the meaning of Article 8(2), notwithstanding the width of the discretion conferred by section 3(5)(a). The claimant should have been allowed opportunity to make representations before disclosure, and the disclosure was unfair, but in the circumstances no damages were to be awarded.
Criminal Justice Act 1987 2(5) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 19 - European Convention on Human Rights 8(3)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]