Judicial Review Flashcards
(17 cards)
What is judicial review
Judicial review is a legal power that is said to be exercised unlawfully by a public body. The claimant argues on the basis of recognised grounds of review
Courts then consider the legality of the decision - did they go beyond the scope of their power
What are the recognised grounds for judicial review
Legality, procedural fairness, unreasonableness and proportionality
When can you initiate judicial review
If there is no right of appeal through tribunals
What was stated in the Independent Review of Administrative Law
There has not, never has been and never will be a fixed idea of the appropriate place of judicial review in the constitution
Opinion differs as to where the lines of justiciability & non justiciability are drawn
What does JR conflict with
Separation of Powers
Sovereignty of Parliament
Accountability
Rule of Law
What is the Ultra Vires principle
Acting beyond the scope of their powers
Exercising power given to them by statute & go beyond scope of discretion
GCHQ 1985
GCHQ a UK intelligence agency
Margaret Thatcher prevented GCHQ employees from joining trade unions, citing national security concerns
This decision was made using royal prerogative powers, rather than legislation.
HC held that ban was invalid as national security concerns made JR impossible.
This confirmed that government decisions must be lawful
What are the 3 main grounds for JR
Illegality - Understood the law & given effect to it
Irrationality - Was the decision reasonable. Was it one that no reasonable public body could have made
Procedural Impropriety - Was the decision justified
Lord Diplock GCHQ - A decision is illegal if the decision maker misunderstands or misapplies the law.
Who decides this? The judges
What are some statistics for JR
Cases that reached final hearing
2022 - 274
2023 - 186
2024 - 76
What are arguments for judicial review of illegality
Person making the decision has misinterpreted the legal instrument
They had no legal duty to make decision
They improperly delegate decision making power
Fail to account relevant considerations
What is a leading case on discretion
M v Scottish Ministers 2012 UKSC
Mental health (Core and treatment) (S) Act 2003
Regulations regarding qualifying patients came into force after statute came into force
Qualifying patient wanted to move to a lower security hospital but wasn’t able to as minister responsible hadn’t made the regulations
Held that discretionary power was constrained by legal duty to act by specified date (Minister liable)
Padfield v Minister of Agriculture 1968
Gov set prices for milk, including extra costs for transport
South West farmers argued this was too low
Minister had power (discretion) to appoint committee to investigate & act
How much discretion did he have? Could he refuse to act?
Ministers discretion isn’t an absolute, can’t refuse a complaint for improper reasons
What was stated in ex P World Development 1995
It is up to the decision maker to find the implied purpose of the statute
What is unreasonableness
= rationality (Quality of decision)
Is the standard by which the common law measures the conduct of a decision maker
Wednesbury KB 1948
Broad discretion placed on public authority as to what can open on a Sunday
Restriction of age on cinema, argued unreasonable
Court disagreed
“…so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it…” “… something overwhelming”
What are the 2 aspects of unreasonableness review
1) Process rationality - decision maker takes account of all relevant decisions
2) Outcome - Outcome is unreasonable
Describe the overlap between relevance & unreasonableness
If factors are taken and considered what weight should be given to Fiona’s oranges, then that will be a good decision
