Following an examination of the procedural prerequisites for judicial review, each of the claimants
will be advised as to the likelihood of bringing a successful claim based on their individual grounds
for review.
Amenability
As the North Shire Council derives its authority from statute, the Eat Local Act 2022, it is a public
body following Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service, 1 and satisfies
amenability due to exercising a public function as defined by Part 54.1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules
2000,2 and is subject to judicial review.
Reviewable decision and standing
To obtain the court’s permission to seek judicial review, each of the claimants are required to have
an arguable case, prove that there would have been a substantially different outcome had the
council acted lawfully, and have locus standi.
Following R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Swati, 3 the claimants must show
that there is a ‘prima facie’ possibility that they may succeed in their eventual claim. Firstly, the
council acted irrationally in suggesting that Nomado was not a sustainable choice for North Shire and
acted procedurally improper in denying their right to be heard before the decision was made. Thus,
it is reasonable to suggest that Nomado would have been granted a license had the council acted
lawfully. Likewise, the council acted irrationally regarding the distance of Caterose’s warehouse and
frustrated a substantive legitimate expectation signifying that a license would have been granted
had the council acted on their promise. Thirdly, the council acted procedurally improper in refusing
to grant Resco a license and it is evident that had Maria, the council’s chair, not been biased on
account of her daughter’s death, a license would have been accorded.
1
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374
2
Civil Procedure Rules 2000, Part 54.1(2)
3
R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Swati, [1986] 1 All ER 717
Page 1 of 7
will be advised as to the likelihood of bringing a successful claim based on their individual grounds
for review.
Amenability
As the North Shire Council derives its authority from statute, the Eat Local Act 2022, it is a public
body following Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service, 1 and satisfies
amenability due to exercising a public function as defined by Part 54.1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules
2000,2 and is subject to judicial review.
Reviewable decision and standing
To obtain the court’s permission to seek judicial review, each of the claimants are required to have
an arguable case, prove that there would have been a substantially different outcome had the
council acted lawfully, and have locus standi.
Following R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Swati, 3 the claimants must show
that there is a ‘prima facie’ possibility that they may succeed in their eventual claim. Firstly, the
council acted irrationally in suggesting that Nomado was not a sustainable choice for North Shire and
acted procedurally improper in denying their right to be heard before the decision was made. Thus,
it is reasonable to suggest that Nomado would have been granted a license had the council acted
lawfully. Likewise, the council acted irrationally regarding the distance of Caterose’s warehouse and
frustrated a substantive legitimate expectation signifying that a license would have been granted
had the council acted on their promise. Thirdly, the council acted procedurally improper in refusing
to grant Resco a license and it is evident that had Maria, the council’s chair, not been biased on
account of her daughter’s death, a license would have been accorded.
1
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374
2
Civil Procedure Rules 2000, Part 54.1(2)
3
R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Swati, [1986] 1 All ER 717
Page 1 of 7
