This chapter addresses issues that must be confronted by litigants who propose to launch judicial review proceedings, and by courts dealing with such claims. First, it considers what sort of decisions can be judicially reviewed. Second, it examines the procedure under which courts subject decisions to judicial review. Third, it looks at the remedies that courts may issue in judicial review proceedings.
Chapter
14. Judicial Review—Scope, Procedures, and Remedies
Chapter
10. Introduction to administrative lawThe foundations and extent of judicial review
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the concept of judicial review. Judicial review allows a High Court judge to examine the lawfulness of decisions made by public bodies carrying out their public functions and enactments where there is no right of appeal or where all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. The defendant must be a public body, the subject matter of a claim must be a public law matter, and the claimant must have the right to claim. This chapter also looks at the basis procedure for judicial review.
Chapter
11. Grounds for judicial reviewIllegality
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter looks at the classification of grounds for judicial review, illegality, ultra vires, jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional error, subjective discretion and the ultra vires doctrine, improper purpose with or without express stipulation in the empowering statute, mixed motives, relevant and irrelevant considerations with or without express stipulation in the empowering statute, lack of evidence, and unlawful failure to exercise a discretionary power by policy, estoppel based on a representation made by an official, agreement, or wrongful delegation.
Chapter
10. Administrative law: judicial review
The Q&A series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each chapter includes typical questions, diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic, and suggestions on further reading. This chapter is about judicial review. This is the means by which the citizen can use the courts to ensure that a public body obeys the law. The questions in the chapter deal with issues such as the erratic development of administrative law; the procedure to apply for judicial review; the right to apply (locus standi), procedural ultra vires; natural justice; and substantive ultra vires.
Chapter
11. Administrative law: ombudsmen, tribunals, and delegated legislation
The Q&A series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each chapter includes typical questions, diagram problem and essay answer plans, suggested answers, notes of caution, tips on obtaining extra marks, the key debates on each topic, and suggestions on further reading. This chapter is about administrative law. The citizen may use judicial review in the courts to ensure that public bodies obey the law, but there are alternatives to the courts, such as the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and the tribunal system. The questions here deal with issues such as the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman; the tribunal system; and delegated legislation such as statutory instruments.
Book
William Wade, Christopher Forsyth, and Julian Ghosh
Wade & Forsyth’s Administrative Law provides a perceptive account, and an unparalleled level of coverage, of the principles of judicial review and a sketch of the administrative arrangements of the UK. First published in 1961, Administrative Law a classic text. In the twelfth edition, the text brings its account of administrative law up to date in light of recent case law and legislation. The volume covers the following areas of administrative law: authorities and their functions; the influence of Europe; powers and jurisdiction; discretionary power; natural justice; remedies and liability; and administrative legislation and adjudication.
Chapter
17. Boundaries of Judicial Review
Sir William Wade, Christopher Forsyth, and Julian Ghosh
This chapter discusses the scope of judicial review. Judicial review is a procedure for obtaining the remedies specified in the Senior Courts Act 1981, namely the quashing order, the prohibiting order and the mandatory order, and declaration and injunction. The scope of judicial review, therefore, is the same as the scope of these remedies. Their boundaries, as set out already, are fairly clear, but in the non-statutory area they are uncertain.
Chapter
18. Procedure of Judicial Review
Sir William Wade, Christopher Forsyth, and Julian Ghosh
This chapter discusses the application for judicial review. The development of the application is complicated and intertwined with the historical deficiencies and peculiarities of the remedies themselves. Thus, the chapter begins with an account of the defects in the prerogative remedies that spurred the creation of the application. It then discusses the creation of the application for judicial review and subsequent developments; and the divorce of public and private law.
Chapter
24. Statutory and Other Inquiries
Sir William Wade, Christopher Forsyth, and Julian Ghosh
This chapter begins with a discussion of statutory inquiry, which is the standard technique for giving a fair hearing to objectors before the final decision is made on some question of government policy affecting citizens’ rights or interests. It then turns to complaints and reforms; law and practice today in statutory inquiries; and other inquiry procedures.
Chapter
8. Jurisdiction Over Fact and Law
Sir William Wade, Christopher Forsyth, and Julian Ghosh
This chapter discusses the objective boundaries of discretionary powers and the way in which the courts police them. Inherent in all discretionary power is the power to decide freely, whether rightly or wrongly, without liability to correction, within the area of discretion allowed by the law. Until fairly recently this liberty to make mistakes within jurisdiction extended to significant mistakes both of law and of fact. The extent to which both these classes of error have been brought within the scope of judicial review is explained.
Chapter
10. Introduction to administrative law
The foundations and extent of judicial review
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the concept of judicial review. Judicial review allows a High Court judge to examine the lawfulness of decisions made by public bodies carrying out their public functions and enactments where there is no right of appeal or where all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. The defendant must be a public body, the subject matter of a claim must be a public law matter, and the claimant must have the right to claim. This chapter also looks at the basis procedure for judicial review.
Chapter
11. Grounds for judicial review
Illegality
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter looks at the classification of grounds for judicial review, illegality, ultra vires, jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional error, subjective discretion and the ultra vires doctrine, improper purpose with or without express stipulation in the empowering statute, mixed motives, relevant and irrelevant considerations with or without express stipulation in the empowering statute, lack of evidence, and unlawful failure to exercise a discretionary power by policy, estoppel based on a representation made by an official, agreement, or wrongful delegation.
Chapter
20. Judicial Review: Putting It All Together in Problem Answers
Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter ties together the loose strands of judicial review to provide a checklist of issues that must be considered in order to diagnose a judicial review problem and to provide a legal opinion for clients. The following questions are addressed: What are judicial review problem questions designed to test? How does one approach a judicial review problem question? How does one approach whether the body may be judicially reviewed? How does one approach whether the client has standing or may intervene in an action? How does one approach whether the other preconditions are met? How does one approach the grounds for review? How does one deal with issues of remedy? How does one provide a final assessment to the client?
Chapter
19. Remedies
Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the remedies granted by the court. If a claimant successfully establishes that the public authority has acted in contravention of one of the grounds of review, then the court may grant a remedy. The purpose of a remedy is to tell the public authority what it has to do to comply with the judgment and to ensure, as far as possible, that it obeys the courts’ decision. There are two main types of remedies available in judicial review cases: ordinary remedies (injunction, declaration, and damages) and prerogative remedies (quashing order, prohibiting order, and mandatory order). The chapter also discusses situations that may cause the court to refuse a remedy and the courts’ powers to grant a remedy under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), including a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 HRA 1998.
Chapter
1. What’s it all about?
This introductory chapter sets out the book’s scope and primary goals, and outlines some useful works on jurisprudence recommended by instructors in American law schools. It explains the central concerns of the subjects, distinguishing between descriptive legal theory, normative legal theory, and critical legal theory, and describes Lon Fuller’s entertaining hypothetical ‘Case of the Speluncean Explorers’, a popular launching pad for the comprehension of legal ideas. The important concept of the rule of law is discussed and analysed. There is an extended account of the controversial question of whether judicial review is undemocratic. The chapter concludes with an explanation of the point of legal theory.
Chapter
14. Judicial Review—Scope, Procedures, and Remedies
This chapter addresses issues that must be confronted by litigants who propose to launch judicial review proceedings, and by courts dealing with such claims. The reluctance of the courts to allow their supervisory jurisdiction to be ousted by legislation, their preparedness to hear claims from parties unaffected by the challenged decision when this is necessary for the maintenance of the rule of law, and their willingness to rule in advance on important legal questions all paint a picture in which judicial review plays a fundamental role in ensuring good governance. The chapter first, it considers what sort of decisions can be judicially reviewed. Second, it examines the procedure under which courts subject decisions to judicial review. Third, it looks at the remedies that courts may issue in judicial review proceedings.
Chapter
13. Judicial review: unreasonableness and proportionality
This chapter explores irrationality, the second ground for judicial review identified by Lord Diplock in Council of Civil Service Unions and Others v Minister for the Civil Service. It examines the meaning of this principle, its foundation upon the test of unreasonableness, and the approach that the courts have adopted since that case. Irrationality, and the notion of unreasonableness upon which it is based, is a particularly vague and ambiguous term, with a range of possible interpretations and meanings. This has meant that the courts have often considered judicial review claims, brought on the basis of irrationality, with varying degrees of caution, often employing the necessary tests with notable stringency. In part as a result of this, and in part also due to the increasing influence of European legal practices on the UK system, the test of proportionality has developed as a substantive ground for judicial review, often overlapping and sometimes conflicting with application of the irrationality doctrine.
Chapter
2. The rule of law and the rule of judges
At common law, the judges will hold administrative conduct to be unlawful on any of three grounds: error of law (and certain sorts of error of fact), lack of due process, and the improper exercise of discretionary power. This chapter discusses how (and to what extent) the three grounds of judicial review are supported by constitutional principle. Each ground must be controlled by the principle of comity. The principle of comity requires judges to defer to administrative authorities on some issues, to some extent; the chapter explains the limits of deference and the difference—and the connections—between the rule of law and the rule of judges.
Chapter
Smith and Grady v United Kingdom [1999] ECHR 72, European Court of Human Rights
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Smith and Grady v United Kingdom [1999] ECHR 72, European Court of Human Rights. This case examined the now-defunct provisions against gay people serving in the British military, and how using either unreasonableness or proportionality produced different outcomes. It also considers the contribution which a rights-based approach to legal questions, drawing on proportionality, can make to the development of law and policy. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 19, Supreme Court
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 19, Supreme Court. This case considers the introduction of proportionality as a ground of judicial review beyond human rights and European Union law in the United Kingdom. The relationship between proportionality and Wednesbury unreasonableness is also discussed. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
