The Nature, Process and Limits of Judicial Review

Question 1

What is the primary purpose of judicial review in UK public law?
A. To ensure public bodies act within the scope of their legal powers
B. To determine whether a policy is fair
C. To assess whether government policies are effective
D. To punish unlawful conduct by officials

Answer 1

A. To ensure public bodies act within the scope of their legal powers
Explanation: Judicial review is concerned with legality, not merits. It ensures decisions comply with legal authority.

Question 2

What must a claimant show to have standing in a judicial review claim?
A. That they are a public official
B. That the case has public support
C. That they are personally affected financially
D. That they have a sufficient interest in the matter

Answer 2

D. That they have a sufficient interest in the matter
Explanation: As per Fleet Street Casuals, a claimant must show a sufficient interest, assessed case-by-case, including public interest grounds.

Question 3

What is the time limit for bringing a judicial review claim?
A. Promptly and within 3 months of the decision
B. 12 months from the decision
C. Within 6 months unless Parliament extends it
D. Before the public body takes action

Answer 3

A. Promptly and within 3 months of the decision
Explanation: CPR 54.5 requires JR to be brought promptly, and in any event within 3 months, subject to exceptions.

Question 4

A public body issues a decision contrary to its enabling statute. What ground of review is most appropriate?
A. Proportionality
B. Illegality
C. Bias
D. Delay

Answer 4

B. Illegality
Explanation: Acting outside statutory powers or misapplying the law falls under the ground of illegality (ultra vires).

Question 5

Which case established the three core grounds of judicial review?
A. Anisminic
B. Cart
C. Datafin
D. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ)

Answer 5

D. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ)
Explanation: The GCHQ case (1985) formally identified illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety as core grounds.

Question 6

What does the irrationality ground (Wednesbury unreasonableness) require?
A. That the decision is politically unpopular
B. That the decision ignored public opinion
C. That the decision caused financial loss
D. That the decision is so unreasonable no reasonable authority could have made it

Answer 6

D. That the decision is so unreasonable no reasonable authority could have made it
Explanation: This is the Wednesbury test, a high threshold standard of unreasonableness.

Question 7

Which of the following is not typically a remedy available in judicial review?
A. Quashing order
B. Mandatory order
C. Damages for emotional distress
D. Declaration

Answer 7

C. Damages for emotional distress
Explanation: Damages are rarely awarded in JR, and only where other legal grounds (e.g., breach of HRA) justify them.

Question 8

What is the role of the permission stage in judicial review?
A. To ensure only arguable claims proceed to full hearing
B. To guarantee the claimant wins if permission is granted
C. To allow public consultation
D. To apply financial penalties

Answer 8

A. To ensure only arguable claims proceed to full hearing
Explanation: The permission stage filters out weak or academic cases, protecting courts and public bodies from misuse.

Question 9

What legal principle was affirmed in Anisminic [1969]?
A. Standing requires direct financial loss
B. Ouster clauses cannot prevent review where there is jurisdictional error
C. Policy reasons always override legality
D. Courts must defer to Parliament in all cases

Answer 9

B. Ouster clauses cannot prevent review where there is jurisdictional error
Explanation: Anisminic ruled that errors of law mean decisions are a nullity — even with an ouster clause, courts can review them.

Question 10

Which of the following best reflects a limit of judicial review?
A. Courts can revise public policy if they disagree
B. Courts can determine Parliament’s intentions
C. Courts do not assess the merits of decisions, only legality
D. Courts always strike down poor decisions

Answer 10

C. Courts do not assess the merits of decisions, only legality
Explanation: JR is concerned with process and power, not whether the decision was wise or effective.