Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Constitutional and Administrative Law > Procedural Impropriety > Flashcards

Procedural Impropriety Flashcards

1
Q

Aylesbury Mushrooms

A

Failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements would invalidate the decision

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

R v Soneji

A

Focus on material problem to the decision - did Parliament intend that non-compliance with procedural requirement would result in the decision being invalid?

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

JN (Cameroon)

A

Focus on consequences to the decision

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

Heron

A

Minor irregularities in road signs did not invalidate penalty notice charges

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

Moseley

A

Requirement of consultation means ‘meaningful participation by those consulted’
Needed to be provided with outline of realistic alternatives to proposals and reasons for preferred policy

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

Ridge v Baldwin

A

Duty of fairness applies to all decision makers in all decisions

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

GCHQ

A

Duty to act fairly does not apply where concerns over national security exist

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

Ex parte Pegasus Holdings

A

Duty to act fairly does not apply in emergency cases where public safety demands urgent action

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

R v Cambridgeshire AHA ex parte B

A

Duty to act fairly does not apply in resource allocation cases

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

Durayappah

A

Level of duty depends on nature or status of the post, the circumstances leading to the decision and the sanction itself

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

Lloyd v McMahon

A

Duty to act fairly does not apply where claimant has waived their rights to fairness
Sliding scale - higher the loss = higher level of fairness
Type of body making decision
Type of decision being made
Regulatory decisions require higher duty of fairness than administrative decisions
Oral hearings not always required - writing will be required

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

Ex parte Tilling

A

Licence applications must be heard with a fair and unbiased mind

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

Liverpool Taxis

A

Licensing must be determined in an environment of fairness

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

McInnes v Onslow-Fanne

A

Factors to consider
Livelihood at stake
Application v forfeiture
Legitimate expectation

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

Abbey Mine v Coal Authority

A

Commercial matters do not require disclosure of other companies’ applications

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

R v Dunraven School, ex parte B

A

Must have notice of case against them

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

Ex parte Benaim and Khaida

A

Not required to give full reasons to protect confidential sources of information

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

Errington v Minster for Health

A

Evidence had been heard from one side in absence of the other

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

Ex parte Thorpe

A

Absence of notice may not be unlawful if immaterial

20
Q

Ex parte Polemis

A

Must have reasonable time to respond to the case against them

21
Q

Bank Mellat (No 2)

A

Not given chance to respond - not justified on national security grounds

22
Q

BSkyB v Metropolitan Police

A

Injunction against broadcasting documentary made on basis of hearing with claimants not present - reasons should have been given (position of loss)

23
Q

R (Wright) v SoS Health

A

Must have the right to make written representations before merits of case were decided

24
Q

Ex parte Anderson

A

Oral hearing will depend upon subject matter and substantial issues of fact that cannot be resolved by written application

25
Q

R (Smith & West) v Parol Board

A

Oral hearing would be appropriate when assessing character or allowing prisoner to raise mitigating factors
Revoking individual’s freedom could only be done after an oral hearing

26
Q

Mackay

A

No need for oral hearing where no issues of fact exist

27
Q

Osborn v Parole Board

A

Oral hearing could promote accountability and transparency
When liberty is at stake - oral hearing would be appropriate
Should guard against temptation to refuse oral hearings as a means of saving time or expense

28
Q

Bourgass

A

‘Secretive decisions based on unchallengeable allegations were neither constructive nor appropriate’

29
Q

Wiseman v Borneman

A

Allowed for no initial oral hearing if understood one will take place later

30
Q

Ex parte St Germain

A

Should be able to call witnesses - seriousness of punishment

31
Q

Ex parte Hone

A

No general right to legal representation

32
Q

Pett v Greyhound Racing Association

A

Where body is legalistic in nature, legal representation should be allowed

33
Q

Ex parte Tarrant

A 
Factors to consider:
Seriousness of decision
Point of law in question
Ability to represent themselves
Need for speedy process
34
Q

Ex parte Hasan

A

No common law duty to give reasons

35
Q

Ex parte Doody

A

Should give reasons - accountability and good administration in public life

36
Q

Ex parte Murray

A

Should give reasons if no right to appeal, useful role in highlighting errors

37
Q

Ex parte Institution of Dental Surgery

A

Administrative decision - no need to give reasons due to complexity of decision and range of factors

38
Q

Ex parte Al Fayed

A

Only need to give partial reasons

39
Q

Ex parte McCarthy

A

Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done

40
Q

Dimes v Grand Junction Canal

A

Direct interest = financial gain (automatically invalidates decision)
Necessity - if only person capable of making decision then cannot be disqualified for bias

41
Q

Porter v Magill

A

Indirect interest - is there a real possibility of bias from the point of view of the officious and informed bystander?

42
Q

Ex parte Godden

A

Pre-formed opinion (had already decided case) - indirect bias

43
Q

Franklin v Minister of Town and Country Planning

A

Government ministers will necessarily be biased towards government policy
As long as correct complaints procedure has been complied with, courts will not interfere

44
Q

Hannam

A

Teacher was dismissed by school governors who also sat on council empowered to approve or disapprove of her dismissal - indirect bias

45
Q

Ex parte Quietlyn

A

Democratically elected persons should be entitled to hold strong views on matter of interest to the electors, as long as they considered individual applications

Constitutional and Administrative Law (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions