Regina v Lancashire County Council, ex parte Huddlestone: CA 25 Apr 1986

Sir John Donaldson described judicial review: ‘Certainly it is for the applicant to satisfy the Court of his entitlement to judicial review and it is for the respondent to resist his application, if it considers it to be unjustified. But it is a process which falls to be conducted with all the cards face upwards on the table and [where] the vast majority of the cards will start in the authority’s hands.’ and as to the development of judicial review: ‘This development has created a new relationship between the courts and those who derive their authority from public law, one of partnership based on a common aim, namely the maintenance of the highest standards of public administration . . The analogy is not exact, but just as the judges of the inferior courts when challenged on the exercise of their jurisdiction traditionally explain fully what they have done and why they have done it, but are not partisan in their own defence, so should be the public authorities.’
Parker LJ said that the Defendant in judicial Review: ‘should set out fully what they did and why, so far as is necessary, fully and fairly to meet the challenge.’

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson, Parker LJ

Citations:

[1986] 2 All ER 941

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBritish Broadcasting Corporation v Sugar and Another Admn 27-Apr-2007
The applicant sought publication of a report prepared for the respondent as to the even handedness of its reporting of matters in the middle east. The BBC had refused saying that the release of the report would have direct impact on its ability to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review

Leading Case

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.251563