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.
Judges:
Harrison
Citations:
Times 29-Apr-2003, Gazette 24-Apr-2003
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Powis CA 1981
Material not available to the decision maker should not normally be admitted on an application for a judicial review of that decision. The court described three categories of acceptable new evidence: (1) evidence to show what material was before the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Judicial Review
Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.181621