Judicial Review Cases

Question 1

Which case establishes the procedural exclusivity rule?

Answer 1

O’Rielly v Mackman

Question 2

Which case establishes the nature of powers test?

Answer 2

Datafin

Question 3

R v City Panel on Takeovers and Mergers ex p Datafin (1987) establishes…

Answer 3

Where a body is exercising public law functions it may be sufficient to bring the body within judicial review.

Question 4

What does R v Servite Houses ex p Goldsmiths establish?

Answer 4

To decide whether the body is amenable to judicial review courts must consider the ‘public element or flavour’ of the arrangement.

Question 5

What does R (Beer) v Hampshire Farmers Markets Ltd establish?

Answer 5

That where a public body sets up a private company, the private company is likely to be amenable to judicial review.

Question 6

What does Sharma v Brown-Antione establish?

Answer 6

Court must find that there is an arguable ground of judicial review with a realistic prospect of success.

Question 7

s.31(2A)(b) Senior Courts Act 1981

Answer 7

A court will refuse to grant standing if it is ‘highly likely’ there would not be a ‘substantially different outcome’ for the applicant.

Question 8

s.31(3) Senior Courts Act 1981

Answer 8

Applicant must have sufficient interest in the decision.

Question 9

What does IRC v National Federation of the Self-Employed (Fleet Street Casuals) establish?

Answer 9

Clarified the sufficient interest test - Lord Wilberforce:
In deciding sufficient interest, the court considers:

• Powers and duties in law of those against whom a remedy is asked.
• Position of the applicant in relation to those powers and duties.
• The breach alleged.

Question 10

What does Walton v Scottish Ministers establish?

Answer 10

Deciding whether an applicant has sufficient interest is at the court’s discretion.

Question 11

What does Ex Parte Rose Theatre Trust Co establish?

Answer 11

Individuals without standing cannot band together in a group to claim greater interest.

Question 12

What does Greenpeace establish?

Answer 12

Standing was granted to group with 2500 members, each living in the locality (so had standing).

Court considered:
- Nature of the applicants
- Interests in issues raised
- Remedy sought

Question 13

What does World Development Movement establish?

Answer 13

Standing was granted to challenge the construction of a Malaysian power plant. Main reason for decision was the lack of another responsible challenger.

Question 14

What does Good Law Project establish?

Answer 14

That regardless of the nature of a group, no group has sufficient interest to have standing in all judicial review cases, regardless of a ‘sincere interest in public law issues’.

Question 15

What does R (Cowl) v Plymouth City Council establish?

Answer 15

Standing will not be granted where another remedy is available, i.e. an appeals panel, tribunal or review.

Question 16

What does Attorney General v Fulham Corporation establish?

Answer 16

Local authority setting up laundry services rather than a washhouse (as was set out in the Act) was ultra vires.

Question 17

What does Anisminic establish?

Answer 17

Confirmed that ‘all relevant errors of law are open to challenge’.

Question 18

What does Ex Parte Khawaja establish?

Answer 18

Where facts must be established, belief in a fact is insufficient, evidence is required to support that belief.

Question 19

What does E v SSHD establish?

Answer 19

Mistakes of fact are a separate head of challenge for judicial review - 4 factors:

1) Must be a mistake of existing fact or mistake as to availability of evidence on a matter.

2) Fact must be established so it is uncontentious and objectively verifiable.

3) Appellant must not be responsible for the mistake

4) Mistake must have played a material - but not necessarily decisive - part in the tribunal’s reasoning.

Question 20

What does Padfield v Minister for Agriculture establish?

Answer 20

Minister’s exercise of a statutory power to create a complaint’s committee to instead remove the ability to make complaints was held to be an improper use of the statutory power.

Question 21

What does Porter v Magill establish?

Answer 21

Council selling houses to constituents to gain an electoral advantage was using statutory powers for an improper purpose.

Question 22

What does the 1st limb of Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corporation establish?

Answer 22

Decision makers must consider relevant matters and exclude irrelevant considerations from their assessment.

Question 23

What does Tameside Metropolitan BC establish?

Answer 23

A decision-maker must ‘ask himself the right question and take reasonable steps to acquaint himself with the relevant information to enable him to answer it correctly.’

Question 24

What does Wheeler v Leicester City Council establish?

Answer 24

Council banning rugby club from using council’s grounds was held to be an irrelevant consideration - the council’s powers were to manage the grounds, not to facilitate harmonious political relationships.

Question 25

What does Ex p Venables and Thompson establish?

Answer 25

Home Secretary considering newspaper petitions was an irrelevant consideration - should instead have considered the judge’s sentencing recommendation.

Question 26

What does R (DSD) v John Radford establish?

Answer 26

Parol Board’s failure to consider other alleged offences against Worboys / Radford was failure to consider a relevant consideration.

Question 27

What does Barnard v National Dock Labour Board establish?

Answer 27

Sub-delegating powers from local board to port manager was wrongful delegation.

Question 28

What does Carltona v Commissioner of Works establish?

Answer 28

Exception to the wrongful delegation principle:
Ministers CAN delegate administrative functions to civil servants.

Question 29

What does Ex parte Kynock establish?

Answer 29

That Port Authority’s rigid application of its policy did not consider the application properly. Court held that the authority must not close its ears to applications.

Question 30

What does British Oxygen v Minister for Technology establish?

Answer 30

Authority must not refuse to listen altogether and must consider cases which fall on the margins of their policy.

Question 31

What does R (MA) v SSWP establish?

Answer 31

That the public sector equality duty is not a duty to achieve specific results, but instead to look at equality considerations when making a decision.

Question 32

What does Brackling v SSWP establish?

Answer 32

Secretary of State closing the Independent Living Fund with immediate effect did not satisfy the ‘due regard’ duty under s.149 Equality Act 2010.

Question 33

What does the 2nd limb of Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corporation establish?

Answer 33

‘So unreasonable’ test
If a decision is ‘so unreasonable’ that ‘no reasonable authority’ would come to it, the courts can intervene, however evidence must be ‘overwhelming’.

Question 34

What did Lord Diplock establish in CCSU / GCHQ about the Wednesbury Unreasonableness test?

Answer 34

That for judicial review on the grounds of irrationality, a decision must be ‘so outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that… no sensible person… could have arrived at it.’

Question 35

What does R (Dolan) v SSHC establish?

Answer 35

Courts held that the Covid lockdown was not irrational, due to the:

• Unclear long-term impacts of Covid
• Government’s advice from experts
• Regulations had Parliament’s approval

Question 36

What does R (Johnson) v SSWP establish?

Answer 36

Universal Credit calculations meant changes in payment date could delay or change the amount of credit available each month.

Court of Appeal held that the Secretary of State (responsible for the policy) failure to find a solution was irrational due to:

• Policy’s perverse consequences
• Ease of resolving the problem
• Rationality of failing to enact a solution

Question 37

What does Ex Parte Nottingham City Council establish?

Answer 37

‘Constitutional limits’ exist where courts will not interfere in a public body’s decision.

Question 38

What does Ex Parte Smith and Grady establish?

Answer 38

That the irrationality (Wednesbury Unreasonableness) threshold is a high one, as gay people removed from armed forces based on national security concerns was held by the courts NOT to be irrational / Wednesbury unreasonable.

Question 39

What does Ex Parte Brind establish?

Answer 39

Anxious Scrutiny

‘whether a reasonable Secretary of State, on the material before him, could reasonably make’ that decision.

Question 40

What does Ex Parte Javed establish?

Answer 40

Anxious Scrutiny

Designating Pakistan as a safe country for asylum seeker to be removed to was held to be irrational, based on evidence of persecution of women who left the marital home in Pakistan.

Question 41

What does Keyu v SSFCA establish?

Answer 41

Supreme Court rejected considering ending Wednesbury unreasonableness (anxious scrutiny) despite existence of the proportionality test (stronger form of review).

Question 42

What does Bradbury v Enfield establish?

Answer 42

Duty to give notice is usually mandatory:

Local authority’s failure to give notice of school’s closure was a mandatory requirement, so the court granted an injunction to delay reorganisation until proper procedure had been followed.

Question 43

What does Coney v Choyce establish?

Answer 43

Duty to give notice was directory: ‘sunstantial’ compliance with aim and purpose of the Act was sufficient.

Question 44

What does Aylesbury Mushrooms establish?

Answer 44

Duty to consult is usually mandatory:

Requirement to consult meant an attempt to consult was insufficient: actual consultation was required.

Question 45

What does R v Brent LBC ex parte Gunning establish?

Answer 45

Sets out the 4 requirements of consultation:

1) Consultation must be made when proposals are at a formative stage

2) Must be reasons given for proposal

3) Adequate time must be given to enable consideration and response

4) Product of consultation must be considered when formulating the decision.

Question 46

What does Ridge v Baldwin establish?

Answer 46

Chief Constable of Brighton was dismissed without notice or a hearing. Court held that Ridge should have been informed of allegations against him and should have had the opportunity to rebut the accusations due to the serious consequences of the decision (loss of livelihood, and pension).

Question 47

What does Cooper v Wandsworth establish?

Answer 47

Board should have given Cooper a hearing before demolishing his house due to the serious personal consequences / losses resulting from the decision.

Question 48

What does Ex parte Germain establish?

Answer 48

Prison riot accusations. Court held that prisoners should have had the right to be heard due to the potential loss of their liberty.

Question 49

What does R v Sussex Justice ex parte McCarthy establish?

Answer 49

The appearance of bias is sufficient: actual bias is unnecessary.

Question 50

What does Porter v Magill establish?

Answer 50

The test for bias:

Would ‘the fair-minded and informed observer… conclude there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased.’

Question 51

What does Locabail v Bayfield Properties establish?

Answer 51

Set out multiple factors which will not bias a decision (based on characteristics of the judge).

Question 52

What does R v SSHD ex parte Doody establish?

Answer 52

Court held that Parole Board’s rejection of prisoners’ parole applications without reasons meant prisoners’ liberty was at stake and could not work towards gaining parole in future without reasons.

Question 53

What does Ex Parte Institute for Dental Surgery establish?

Answer 53

The duty to give reasons only applies where fairness / justice demands reasons to be given.

Question 54

What does Oakley establish?

Answer 54

There was a duty to give reasons as consultation was undermined if representees were ‘left in the dark’ as to the impact of their representations.

Question 55

What does AG for Hong Kong v Ng Yuen Shiu establish?

Answer 55

Expectation that a certain procedure would be followed created a legitimate expectation for a fair hearing.

Question 56

What does Ex Parte Asif Mahmood Khan establish?

Answer 56

That a circular letter setting out conditions / paperwork required for adoption application created a procedural expectation that this process would be followed. Court held that a procedural expectation existed to follow these policy documents (and not the later policy).

Question 57

What does Ex Parte Coughlan establish?

Answer 57

That the local authority’s promise Coughlan would have a ‘home for life’ at her care home created a substantive legitimate expectation that she could remain there.

Set out 3 criteria for establishing a legitimate expectation:

1) Promise made to a specific individual / defined class of people.

2) Of great importance to the individual

3) Court must weigh up fulfilling the promise made to the individual and the public interest.