Lecture 20-Judicual review Putting it all together
In this session
- A reminder of the correct structure for judicial review
- A worked example
BASIC STRUCTURE FOR ALL JR PROBLEMS
PERMISSION STAGE
- decision made by a public body?
- claimant with sufficient interest
- in time?
ARGUABLE GROUNDS
- any kinds of illegality?
- any kinds of procedural impropriety?
- irrationality?
- Proportionality?
REMEDY
- quashing order/ mandatory order/ declaration/ injunction
- Damages only if HR claim
WHERE IN THE STRUCTURE IS DETAIL REQUIRED?
Issues in the case = parts of the structure where there is more likely to be disagreement or difficulty
satisfying the court
PERMISSION STAGE 1:
is the decision made by a public body?
yes- DECISION CAN BE MOVED ONTO PERMISSION STAGE 2
if no then…
is the decision one made by a private company, who is doing the work of a public body? (DATAFIN)
- Yes- DECISION CAN BE MOVED ONTO PERMISSION STAGE 2
- no- NO JUDICIAL REVIEW
PERMISSION STAGE 2: Sufficient interest S31 SCA 1981
Individual client Organisation client
1. are they directly impacted (BINKS)? IF 1. is the organisation representing
YES go to stage 3 collective interests of all members? if
YES go to stage 3
IF NO IF NO
2. are they asking for a review of a 2. is the organisation able to show (a)
matter of general public importance matter of general public importance (b)
(REES-MOGG/MILLER)? if YES go to they have expertise/ resources to bring
, permission stage 3 if NO no JR a strong claim (c) some members have
individual sufficient interest
(GREENPEACE)? if YES go to permission
stage 3 if NO no JR
PERMISSION STAGE 3: TIME LIMITS
was the decision made within the last 3 month
if yes….
if no….
then if there was a shorter time limit (partial ouster
will the court consider a late claim?
clause) was the decision made within this new time
- general public importance
frame? - hardship (cost) to 3rd party
- good reason for being late
if no then no judicial review
if yes….
permission stage complete, move to grounds
CHECKLIST OF GROUNDS
In this session
- A reminder of the correct structure for judicial review
- A worked example
BASIC STRUCTURE FOR ALL JR PROBLEMS
PERMISSION STAGE
- decision made by a public body?
- claimant with sufficient interest
- in time?
ARGUABLE GROUNDS
- any kinds of illegality?
- any kinds of procedural impropriety?
- irrationality?
- Proportionality?
REMEDY
- quashing order/ mandatory order/ declaration/ injunction
- Damages only if HR claim
WHERE IN THE STRUCTURE IS DETAIL REQUIRED?
Issues in the case = parts of the structure where there is more likely to be disagreement or difficulty
satisfying the court
PERMISSION STAGE 1:
is the decision made by a public body?
yes- DECISION CAN BE MOVED ONTO PERMISSION STAGE 2
if no then…
is the decision one made by a private company, who is doing the work of a public body? (DATAFIN)
- Yes- DECISION CAN BE MOVED ONTO PERMISSION STAGE 2
- no- NO JUDICIAL REVIEW
PERMISSION STAGE 2: Sufficient interest S31 SCA 1981
Individual client Organisation client
1. are they directly impacted (BINKS)? IF 1. is the organisation representing
YES go to stage 3 collective interests of all members? if
YES go to stage 3
IF NO IF NO
2. are they asking for a review of a 2. is the organisation able to show (a)
matter of general public importance matter of general public importance (b)
(REES-MOGG/MILLER)? if YES go to they have expertise/ resources to bring
, permission stage 3 if NO no JR a strong claim (c) some members have
individual sufficient interest
(GREENPEACE)? if YES go to permission
stage 3 if NO no JR
PERMISSION STAGE 3: TIME LIMITS
was the decision made within the last 3 month
if yes….
if no….
then if there was a shorter time limit (partial ouster
will the court consider a late claim?
clause) was the decision made within this new time
- general public importance
frame? - hardship (cost) to 3rd party
- good reason for being late
if no then no judicial review
if yes….
permission stage complete, move to grounds
CHECKLIST OF GROUNDS
