1

Question 1

Baggs Case

Answer 1

early case which shows origins of Admin law

Question 2

what admin law does

Answer 2

controls the use of public power
main method of accountability is judicial review
concerns the executive
any public body
even some judicial bodies

Question 3

what is judicial review

Answer 3

distinct from political mechanisms of accountability
relationship to parliamentary sovereignty
relationship to rule of law
relationship to separation of powers

Question 4

difference between review and appeal

Answer 4

asks is this decision lawful, not is this a bad decision
court cannot replace og decision with its own, except when og decision maker was court/tribunal

Question 5

R v Cambridge Health Authority, ex parte B

Answer 5

“we have one function only, which is to rule upon the lawfulness of decisions.”

Question 6

CPR

Answer 6

civil procedure rules 1998, not primary legislation

Question 7

CPR 54.1

Answer 7

scope and interpretation of JR
shows it only judges the lawfulness of a decision

Question 8

what is subject to review

Answer 8

decisions, policies, advice and guidance, inaction and delay

Question 9

Datafin

Answer 9

city panel on takeovers and mergers created by banks as a form of self regulation
focus not just on the source of power but also its nature

Question 10

Jockey Club

Answer 10

showed JR can only exist for a public function
religious bodies also do not serve a public function (R v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations, ex parte)

Question 11

universities and JR

Answer 11

universities can perform a public function

Question 12

standing time limits and permission

Answer 12

CPR 54.5 3 month limit “promptly”
permission of the court required CPR 54.4

Question 13

pre action protocol

Answer 13

would be claimant and defendant exchange letters to identify the disputed issues and if the matter can be resolved without litigation
claimant must pursue other remedies first

Question 14

JR remedies

Answer 14

under s31(1) Senior Courts Act 1981:
a) mandatory, prohibiting or quashing order
b) a declaration or injunction

Question 15

quashing order

Answer 15

decision sent back to decision maker
unless decision of a court/tribunal and only one answer

Question 16

Standing

Answer 16

s31(3) Senior Courts Act 1981
“Sufficient interest” test
to see if you can bring JR proceedings

Question 17

personal interest in JR

Answer 17

decision directly affects a persons rights or interests
no need to cite authority beyond s31(3) SCA

Question 18

underlying tension in standing rules

Answer 18

sufficient interest is not limited to personal interest
there is flexibility in the rules and the courts have grappled with competing concerns
preventing challenges from “busybodies”

Question 19

Fleet Street Casuals

Answer 19

the issue of standing may need to be determined at a full hearing

Question 20

Rose Theatre Trust

Answer 20

since no individual has the right for JR it follows that the company created by those individuals has no standing

Question 21

Greenpeace (No.2)

Answer 21

pressure groups may get standing
if it did not a claim would need to be made by an employee or neighbour of the establishment who may not be as qualified as Greenpeace

Question 22

“concerned citizens” and JR

Answer 22

Lord Rees-Mogg brought proceedings because of his sincere concern for constitutional issues

Question 23

standing in Human Rights Cases

Answer 23

HRA 1998 s7
only where he is a victim of the violation
narrower than the sufficient interest test