Delay in application.
Held: The commissioner’s powers cannot depend upon whether the complaint is well founded. He could only act where a complainant did not otherwise have an action at law for a remedy.
As long as no prejudice is caused, the courts will not rely on these provisions to deprive a litigant who has behaved sensibly and reasonably of relief to which he is otherwise entitled.
Woolf LJ said: ‘ . . if the complaint was justified, the person concerned might be entitled to obtain some form of remedy in respect of the subject matter of the complaint if he had commenced proceedings within the appropriate time limits. The commissioner is not concerned to consider whether in fact the proceedings would succeed.’
Judges:
Woolf LJ
Citations:
[1989] 1 All ER 1033, [1989] COD 226, [1989] Fam Law 187
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Mentioned – Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others Admn 18-Apr-2002
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act.
Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any . .
Cited – JR55, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) SC 11-May-2016
The Court was asked about the powers of the Complaints Commissioner under the 1996 Order, and in particular about his powers in relation to general medical practitioners working in the National Health Service and whether, and if so in what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Local Government, Administrative
Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.223701
