Administrative Law Flashcards
Standing for JR
Sufficient interest - not if interests are affected but do they have a good case
What makes an interested party for JR
Directly affected by decision
Things court will consider when deciding whether to admit an interested party
Size of organisation and number of members affected Rule of law Importance of issue Chance of another complainant Nature of breach
Which court is JR in and which is it appealed to
In HC. Appeal from administrative court to court of appeal
When won’t permission for JR be granted
Not a public law matter
Other appeal options not exhausted
Not appropriate on policy grounds
Wouldn’t have been substantially different for applicant
Time limit for JR claim
Three months from grounds arising
How to tell if it is a public body
Is the source of its powers royal prerogative? If not apply Datafin
What did datafin say to consider
Is it a public body?
Source of power (not only consent)
Nature of body’s duties (public law duties)
Consequences of body’s decisions (public law sanctions)
What to consider when deciding if a body is a public body
Do it’s decisions affect the public at large
Can it’s decisions be imposed without consent
Are they carrying out functions normally performed by an organ of gov
Is there any statutory regulations or gov control
What does the PAP for JR require
C to write to D with letter before claim
D has 14 days to reply
(Organise funding here if C is using public funds)
File claim form promptly and not later than 3 months after grounds arose
Serve claim form on D and interested parties within 7 days of its issue
Can parties agree to extend three month JR time limit
No
Do parties always have to follow JR PAP
Not if they think it’s inappropriate but must say why you think this in the claim form
Remedies for JR
Declaration of unlawfulness Prohibitory order Mandatory order Quashing order Injunction Damages in conjunction with above but not alone ( same for restitution or sum due)
Illegality includes….
Ultra Vires Improper purpose Relevant and irrelevant considerations Lack of evidence Unlawfully failing to exercise a discretionary power
Ultra vires
Must not go beyond powers conferred
Empowering act will say what powers conferred
Not just if the power is conferred but also how it was used
Misinterpreted or abused power?
Improper purpose
If purpose is in statute then that is exhaustive
If not the court will imply purpose.
Cannot use power to:
Penalise conduct
Promote political and moral views
Gain and unauthorised financial advantage
Defeat the power and purpose of the act
What if there is more than one purpose? (Improper purpose- illegality)
If main purpose of valid secondary invalid purpose cannot make decision unlawful unless it significantly influenced the decision
Relevant and irrelevant considerations
If expressed in statute then that is exhaustive
If not then implied the same as improper purpose
Lack of evidence
Decisions must be based on facts and evidence before the body
Cannot ignore relevant evidence, misinterpret evidence or unreasonably make a decision which is contrary to the weight of evidence presented during decision making process LPC
Unlawful failure to exercise a discretionary power
When the body refuses to think about exercising discretion
or
When they consider exercising discretion but decide not to
Can have policy but cannot refuse to consider a type of application. Consider all on their merits. Do not rule out changing policy and listen to arguments to change it
What does procedural impropriety mean
Breach of natural justice or failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements
Has there been a breach of natural justice
Does NJ apply
To what extent
Has it been breached
Do the rules of natural justice apply
Apply to all courts and tribunals
And where an administrative body acts judicially
Judicially means any decision affecting the rights of the individual
What does it mean to act judicially
Making a decision affecting the rights of the individual
How do you know to what extent the rules of natural justice apply
This depends on the type of hearing
Any legit expectations
National security
Need to keep secrecy for public interest
What does natural justice mean
Impartiality and fairness