public law 2 Flashcards
when can a decision from a non-statutory body be reviewed under JR?
performs functions with a sufficiently public and governmental character. decisions of certain non-statutory bodies could be subject to JR if their functions are such that, in the absence of self-regulation, government would likely need to intervene.
what is the effect of ouster clauses for reviewing a decision in JR? (when is ouster clause not relevant for decision to be reviewed via JR)
ouster clause doesn’t prevent JR if decision is illegal or made outside jurisdiction conferred by statute.
courts are generally hostile to ouster clauses and will interpret them narrowly to uphold rule of law.
if there is a time limitation clause in a decision - do the courts uphold this for purposes of JR?
yes, time limitation clauses generally are upheld as they restrict the time with which JR claims must be brought, thereby promoting legal certainty and administrative efficiency
what are the time limitations for bringing JR application for planning and pubic procurement decisions?
time limits are 6 weeks and 30 days
what is the most common remedy for JR?
quashing order = meaning public body will need to take their decision again
can a public authority delegate their discretionary powers to another entity?
general rule is no they cannot unless there is explicit statutory authorisation
what is the Carltona principle (delegating power from government ministers)?
where discretion is conferred on a government minister, courts will presume, in absence of evidence to the contrary, that the minister is allowed to delegate discretion to officials (civil servants) within his department, even if statute doesnt expressly say so
what is the wednesbury unreasonable test?
a decision on a competent matter is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it
when ECHR rights are engaged what is the JR test that the courts should apply? (rather than the wednesbury unreasonable test)
proportionality test rather than the wednesbury unreasonable test
when a ECHR convention right has been engaged - what test applies (JR)?
proportionality test
when there is no ECHR convention right been engaged - what test applies (JR)?
wednesbury unreasonableness
what is the doctrine of proportionality?
requires that the means employed by a decision-maker to achieve a legitimate aim must be no more than is necessary to achieve that aim
what ground would be used to challenge a decision that didn’t provide a logical sequence of reasoning? (JR)
ground of irrationality (JR)
what does the ground of illegality mean? (JR)
Involves the public body acting outside its statutory powers (ultra vires)
what does the ground of procedural impropriety mean (JR)?
Involves failure to follow correct procedures
what does the ground of unreasonableness mean (JR)?
public body has acted unreasonably = so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it
if there is evidence of bias in a decision what is the legal implication of the decision?
the decision is invalid (automatic disqualification)
what is the difference between direct and indirect bias?
direct bias involves financial interest (therefore, a pecuniary interest) whereas indirect does not involve financial interest but may be due to significant personal relationship or bias on decision
what is procedural legitimate expectation? (when does it arise 2 situations)
1) public body has promised or represented that a particular procedure will be followed before a decision is made
2) where there has been an established practice for the public body to use a particular procedure
what is substantive legitimate expectation?
where an assurance or promise has led a person to believe that they will receive a particular tangible benefit
what must a public body show to lawfully frustrate substantive legitimate expectation?
may lawfully frustrate such an expectation if it can demonstrate that the action was proportionate and necessary in response to significant public interest
when can a public body frustrate a procedural legitimate expectation?
when there are compelling public interest reasons
what does is mean if a ECHR is an ‘absolute right’?
cannot be legitimately interfered with by the state
what does it mean if a ECHR is a ‘limited right’?
that the only way they can legitimately be interfered with is outlined in prescribed circumstances within the article
what does it mean if a ECHR is a ‘qualified right’?
can be interfered with:
a) prescribed by the law
b) in pursuit of a legitimate aim
c) interference is necessary in a democratic society (eg, proportionate)
what are examples of absolute rights?
article 3 = prohibition on tortue or inhuman or degrading treatment
article 4 = prohibition on slavery and forced labour
article 7 = no punishment without lawful authority
what are examples of limited rights?
article 2 = right to life
article 5 = right to liberty and security of a person
article 6 = right to a fair trial and fair legal process
what are examples of qualified rights?
article 8 = right to respect of private and family life
article 9 = freedom of thought, consciousness and religion
article 10 = freedom of express
article 11 = freedom of assembly and association
what is ‘positive obligation’ under ECHR?
state is under a duty to prevent violation of HR being carried out by relevant non-state actors
eg, enacting laws in their domestic legal systems
what is the margin of appreciation?
reflects the idea that contracting states have better knowledge of the political, social and cultural traditions that influence their country. therefore, have discretion when taking legislative, administrative or judicial measures that restrict ECHR rights.
what are areas that ECHtHR allows states to have a broader discretion? (margin of appreciation)
- mortality and religion
- public emergency
- national security
- social, economic and environmental policies
what are areas that ECtHR allows states to have less discretion? (margin of appreciation)
- person’s existence or identity
- person’s liberty
- legal rights