Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Public Law > Judicial Review - Remedies and Procedure > Flashcards

Judicial Review - Remedies and Procedure Flashcards

(49 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

what are the 3 remedies available for JR

A

-prerogative orders
-injunctions and declarations
-damages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is the authority for prerogative orders as a remedy available in JR

A

-s.31(1) Senior Courts Act 1981
-(a) quashing
-(b) prohibiting
-(c) mandating

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what are the 3 subsections in s.31(1) Senior Courts Act 1981

A

-(a) quashing (an unlawful decision)
-(b) prohibiting ( a proposed unlawful decision)
-(c) mandating (the decision-making body to act/perform a public duty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what is the authority for injunctions and declarations as a remdy available in JR

A

-s.31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981 (declaration/injunction can be made having regard to…)
-(a) nature of matters
-(b)nature of the persons and bodies against whom relief may be granted by such orders
-(c) all the circs of the case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is s.31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981

A

-declaration/injunction can be made having regard to…
-(a) nature of matters
-(b)nature of the persons and bodies against whom relief may be granted by such orders
-(c) all the circs of the case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what happened in Miller2/Cherry (2019)

A

-JR challenge to PM BoJo’s decision to prorogue Parl ahead of Brexit negotiation deadline which was ruled unlawful
-quashing order asked for
-UKSC confirmed it was for Parl not UKG to determine next steps as QO determined Parl had not been prorogued thus retained full institutional responsibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is the authority for damages as a remedy available in JR

A

-s.31(4) Senior Court Act (award damages if…)
-(a) applicant includes a claim for such an award arising from any matter to which the application relates
-(b) court is satisfied that such an award would have been made if the claim had been made in a separate action begun by A at the time of making application

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what type of power is awarding damages as a remedy

A

-discretionary power

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what is s.31(2A) an authority for

A

refusal to grant relief

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what is s.31(2A)

A

-High court…
-(a) must refuse to grant relief on an application for JR and
(b) may not award under ss(4) on such an application
if it appears to the court to be highly likely that the outcome of the applicant would not have been substantially different if the conduct complained of had not occurred

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what is s.31(2A) summarised

A

-HC must refuse relief / DP for damages if highly likely that outcome for applicant would not have been substantially different if conduct had not occurred

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what is the exception to refusal to grant relief

A

s.31(2B) SCA
public interest exception
-“reasons of exceptional public interest)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

what is s.31(2B) SCA an authority for

A

-public interest exception to refusal to grant relief

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what are the 3 types of prerogative orders

A

-s.31(1)(a) SCA 1981 quashing
-s.31(1)(b) SCA 1981 prohibiting
-s.31(1)(c) SCA 1981
mandating

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what is the most common type of prerogative order

A

-quashing orders (strikes down/nullified as if it never happened, given back to decision maker to try again)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

what are the 3 basic procedural requirements that govern JR claims?

A

-standing
-time limit
-permission

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

explain the procedural requirement of standing

A

-applicants initiating claims for judicial review must have ‘standing’ =
-s.31(3) SCA 1981 “applicant has sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what is s.31(3) SCA 1981

A

“applicants must have sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates”
= standing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

what is the authority for the test of “sufficient interest”/standing

A

Lord Wilburforce in IRC(1982)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

what is the Lord Wilburforce’s test for sufficient interest/standing in IRC(1982)

Study These Flashcards
A

must consider
(1) the power or duties in law of those against whom the relief is asked
(2) the position of the applicant in relation to those powers

21
Q

what happened in IRC(1982)

Study These Flashcards
A

-federation representing self employed and small businesses seeking judicial review of IRC’s decision on tax for ‘fleet street casuals’
-held NOT sufficient interest

22
Q

what are the 2 case authorities for liberalising the test for sufficient interest by allowing third party groups

Study These Flashcards
A

-WDM (1995)
-Greenpeace (1994)

23
Q

what happened in WDM (1995)

Study These Flashcards
A

-pressure group concerned with misuse of UK aid money held to have sufficient interest had ‘sufficient interest’ to seek JR of gov’s decision to grant development aid to fund Peragu dam (Malaysia)
-YES SUFFICIENT INTEREST

24
Q

what happened in Greenpeace (1994)

Study These Flashcards
A

-Greenpeace held to have sufficient interest to challenge decision to vary the terms of an authorisation to process nuclear waste

25
did the court assess sufficient standing in Plantagenet Alliance (2014)
-"the claimant's interest...that of the... descendants may. not suffice for personal standing. However, the points raised have a broader public interest sufficient for the. Claimant to have standing in this case as a public interest litigant"
26
what is Lord Diplock's view on sufficient interest
-"a grave lacuna in our system of public law" if thirs party groups were prevented from vindicating rule of law and stopping unlawful conduct due to outdated technical rules (like Lord Wilberforce)
27
what is the Plantagenet Alliance (2014) case an authority for
-expansion of sufficient interest so if theres a general public interest the court allows anyone to bring a case to the court with sufficient interest -STANDING IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT OBSTACLE TO CLIENTS
28
is sufficient interest/standing an obstacle to clients
-no bc Plantagenet Alliance (2014)
29
what is the authority for procedural time limites
-part 54, Civil Protection Rules -rule 54.4: claim form must be filed (a) promptly (b) in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose
30
what is part 54.5 Civil Protection Rules
-rule 54.4: claim form must be filed (a) promptly (b) in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose
31
what are the subsections that allow exceptions/conditions for procedural time limits
Part 54(2-6) (2) time limit may not be extended by mutual agreement (3) time limits subject to applicable shorter statutory limits (4,5,6)...
32
explain procedural permission
Part 54 Civil Procedure Rules= requires applicant to seek courts permission to proceed in a claim for JR -Rules 54.10-12= may be given with/without a hearing and with/without directions
32
what is the authority for procedural permission
Part 54 Civil Procedure Rules
33
what are rules Rules 54.10-12 Civil Procedure Rules
permission may be given with/without a hearing and with/without directions
34
what are the 6 stages of the 'pre-litigation protocol' for JR
-letter to public authority -claim form with admin court -notice given to interested parties (21 days to confirm) -granting/denying permission -if granted further evidence filed and substantive hearing takes place -if permission denied, claimant may appeal to CoAppeal
35
what are the 3 key reforms proposed in 2021 report, Independant Review of Administrative Law
4.166; gov can legislate on the issue of standing if they want to, but they say the temptation should be resisted 4.171 not favourable to any tightening of the current time limits for bringing claims for JR 4.173 do more to make procedures for bringing claims of JR accessible to ordinary people
36
summarise the 3 key reforms suggested in 2021 Report Independant Review of Administrative Law
-gov should not be tempted to legislate on issue of standing -no tightening of current time limits -more accessible to ordinary individuals
37
what is s.31(6) Senior Courts Act 1981
-where HC considers there has been undue delay in making an application for JR, court may refuse grant (a) leave for the making of the application (b) any relief (remedies) sought on the application if it considers that the granting of relief would likely cause substantial hardship to or prejudice. the rights of any person or would be detrimental to a good administration
38
why is there a time limit procedure for JR applications
-to not clog up the courts with lots of claims -gives certainty
39
what will courts consider when asked for permission to proceed with an applicants claim
-if applicant has exhausted all other avenues besides the courts and completed 6 pre litigation protocols for JR -eg written to MP/local authority etc
40
is permission granted or refused more
granted
41
how does the current UKG want to reform JR according to Live Reform Proposals March 25
-targeting the tightening of jR procedure (not timing or standing) -trying to tighten permission (inc refusals)
42
why is the current UKG tightening JR procedure via permission (Live Reform Proposals (March 25)
-argue current JR procedural permission is delaying delivery of major infrastructure projects -data shows over hald (58%) of decisions around major infrastructure were taken to court, got in way of Gov growing economy (UKG Jan 2025)
43
what % of decisions of major infrastructure were taken to court and what was the effect (argued by UKG Jan 2025)
-58% over half -gets in way og govs goal to grow economy
44
what are the 3 examples the UKG cites as showing JR over major infrastructure disrupts gov plans to grow economy
-East Anglia wind farms delayed for 2 years -Sizewell C case had HC dismiss it and call it "utterly hopeless' but left uncertain for 2 years -A47 National Highway Project delayed 2 years then dismissed for having 'no logical basis'
45
how long was East Anglia wind farms, Sizewell C and A47 Nationaly Highway Project delayed for
-2 years
46
what happened in Heathrow Airport Ltd (2020)
-JR challenge to UKG's Airports National Policy Statement taken under s.5(1) Planning Act 2008 to facilitate third runway -argued illegality/ failure to heed relevant considerations (Paris Agreement on Climate Change ratified in UK 2016) -HC rejeted, CoAppeal allowed, UKSC overturned -upheld gov decision but took years
47
give a case example of gov decisions being delayed by JR
Heathrow Airport Ltd (2020)
48
what are the reforms in clause 8 suggested by UKG in recent Bill
-removing the right of appeal to the CoAppeal where a claim is decided by the HC at that initial oral hearing to be "totally without merit"

Public Law (22 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions