Judicial Review Flashcards
What is Judicial Review?
Judicial review is a way of holding a public body to account in the United Kingdom by challenging the procedural decisions made not the end decision itself.
What is depicted as a Public Body?
A public body can be defined under the cases of Jockey Club ex parte Aga Khan in which it was decided that the jockey club does not lie within the jurisdiction of public law, as it is a private body. Burton depicted that by public body this can be thought of in two senses of the word, it is either that they effect that of the public or that it is of a government body thus, the Jockey club would be classed as private as it is neither a subject that affects the wider community or is a government body. Another case is Datafin whereby it looks more at the direct functions in order to depict what is public/private. If it is private then its functions will be largely to do with Private functions, Public would mean public.
What is the Ultra Vires method of Judicial review?
The Ultra vires method for judicial review looks at the position of the government body in the decision that they have made and whether or not it lies within or outside of their power. For example, the MP must have ultra vires in all senses of the word, whether that be questions of law and questions of fact. Thus what is actually meant by the definition of what it is that it is looking for and whether that constitutes the definition are valid questions that must be considered.
What must the appellant who wishes to bring a case for judicial review have?
Those wanting to bring about a Judicial review must have a number of things. Under the Criminal Justice and Crime act, Section 84 they must have been given relief by the hHigh court who has given them permission to go for judicial review, this shall not be granted if they do not believe that the decision would change dramatically, if the outcome for the appellant would not be drastic or if there there isn’t a sufficient interest (Public interest). Under 3E, if it is believed to be a matter of public interest then they may forsake subsections a-d in favour of public interest. They must also have Locus Standi and must have completed everything within a 3 month period (wanting judicial review) within a three month period.
What is Locus Standi?
Sufficient interest in the case to stand. This is stop the as Lord Scareman said in the Fleet Street case ‘general busy bodies and mischief makers’ from bringing out a case for judicial review without the sufficient standing in order to do so. Furthermore, ex parte Greenpeace the minister refused to believe that Greenpeace had sufficient standing however it was believed that he did, because of the company and what they specialised in, this brought into consideration of representation by larger bodies such as greeenpeace having sufficient locus stand as they would be known to have the locus standi of their representatives.
What is illegality?
You can only exercise the powers that you process. If a case falls under illegality it is due to the fact that in the Congreve V Secretary of State for the home department. Whereby the levy to increase TV Lincences was not allowed to happen by the executive branch of government my by taking away the license if they didn’t pay. This was seen as illegal
What else is included by Illegality?
Irrelevent and relevant considerations. This would consider the cases of R V Somerset Ex parte Fewings where they had been given permission to grant tenants and the forestry commission however the council decided to ban the hunting of deer and this was seen as bad due to the fact that it was under irrelevant considerations that this had been done. Not due to the fact that they had sufficient case to, they took into account and irrelevant consideration and thats what happened. Init. Furthermore the case of R V Port Talbot Borough council whereby they decided that it would be ok for them to simply decide on giving tenancy to a council owned property to a councillor for the local area, disregarding the normal code and instead deciding that there way a simple need for the councillor who was the councillor for that area to be living amongst it. This was an irrelevant consideration
What else is covered by Illegality?
Delegation of powers. you cannot delegate the powers that you have been given because that is acting outside of the ultra vires principle. If you do then you simply are in line with Barnard V National labour dock board in which it was depicted that the delegation of powers weren’t allowed in the ultra vires, the Board had delegated power to another source, however it wasn’t within the ultra vires for that power to then be delegated further. Thus it was illegal and the suspension was quashed.
What else is covered by illegality?
You cannot fetter discretion or be contrary to the Huamn rights Act 1998. As this would be illegal, for example in R V A (Sexual evidence history) right to a fair trial or the GCHQ case- judicial review.
What is irrationality in relation to Judicial review?
You can bring a case for judicial review if the decision can be seen as irrational. Thus we must rely on Wedsnesbury reasonableness in order to accumulate the answer. If something is so irrational that no public body or somebody of sound mind and gender would come up with it, it would be considered to be irrational. Lord Diplock in the GCHQ case believed that it must be so irrational that it is contrary to logic and moral standards.
What is the case for irrationality?
Associated prinvical picture house v Wednesbury corporation. They applied for a license and when they did they were granted to be able to play movies on a sunday which had been illegal, however when they brought to judicial review, nothing could be done simply due tot he fact that they agreed with the decision but instead that things that were taken into account shouldn’t have been, that there was a severe use of irrationality…
What is procedural Impropriety?
Procedural impropriety is that which improper procedure has occurred. Thus there would have had to have been a problem with Procedure in order for this to have happened. There is a duty to observe procedural requirements
What is the case law?
Aylesbury Mushroom case. This was when the procedure in which there needed to be a notification from the board did not occur and thus because of the procedural impropriety, this could not have happened and. New change in the training regualtions had occurred but Aylesbury had not been properly informed as needed to for procedure and thus, it wasn’t binding on them.
Natural Justice also falls under proceeding impropriety?
The ideals of protecting natural justice and making sure that natural bias is brought against
