Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
:smiley: Judicial control (Ultra vires (E.g. Reily v Sec of State for Work…
:smiley: Judicial control
Judicial control = judges control (happens in divisional court within the Queen's bench (QBD) of the High Courts (HC) in London (goes through process of judicial review procedure)
To be able to get a judicial review procedure you have to have a 'legal standing' to be able to apply and be in QBD of HC
There are 2 main types / grounds which challenge can be based on
substantive ultra vires
DL is not valid either : DL exceeds powers of PA / DL is irrational , unclear or wholly unreasonable / Or that DL breaches natural Justice (prejudicial against some people (background ethics / religion etc) or Human Rights
Procedural ultra vires
Failure to follow the proper (correct) procedure in making DL E.g.Aylesbury Mushroom 1972
Aylesbury Mushroom Case 1972 under the PA of The Industrial Training Act 1964 which states ministers have to consult with relevant groups ; which the ministers didn't consult with the mushroom growers (85% members of the growing Mushroom Association) > Although they did consult with the National Farmers Union but due to ministers failure in consulting with all interested groups it is ultra vires (not valid)
Ultra vires
Outside the powers of PA/EA (therefore unlawful and invalid) - void - therefore it is not judges problem and it is people outside of P fault
No comnpensation > need to sell finance > How is this equal before the law ' to an extent'
E.g. Reily v Sec of State for Work &Pensions (2013)
Situation was that Reily was on benefits and after her graduation she was unable to find a job and she volunteered in local museum in Birmingham but she was forced to volunteer in Poundland and if she doesn't then her benefits would be repealed and Reily argues that this is against the Human Rights Act (HRA)
E.g. Strickland v Hayes (1896)
A local authority by-law that prohibits "singing or recital of obscene songs or ballads or use of obscene language" in public - due to By-law being to wide ranging it was above the power of the Parent Act that was given to them therefore ultra vires (the situation was that a man sang Eskimo Nell in his bathroom with the windows open therefore public could hear it but he was also on his own property)
Intra vires
Within the powers of the PA/EA (therefore lawful and valid) > meaning the law / case has not been successful (judicial rule failed)
E.g. R v Secretary of State for Education and Employment, ex parte National Union of Teachers (2000)
Under PA of Education Act 1996 - Secretary f Education suggests of introducing appraisal scheme for teacher (increase wage) which went above the power given by PA therefore intra vires
E.g. R (Roger) v Swindon NHS Trust 2006
A woman with breast cancer was told if she uses Herceptine Drug there is a 25% higher chance of successful rate but the NHS did not give the Herceptine Drug to her because it was expensive (therefore purely based on cost)
Boddington v British Transport Police (1998)
under the PA of The Transport Act 1962 to make by-laws to ban smoking on train platforms (but the challenge was that the by-law did not include the word 'ban' smoking > Boddington was convicted in Magistrate court and was fined £10 > case reached HoL (now the supreme court) and by-law was declared valid therefore intra vires
Do you think Judicial Review is effective?
1) lack awareness of its existence
2) only people with legal standing can apply (people directly affected by DL)
Now pressure groups can apply - also individual trade unions can support somebody for their cause (if they are influenced)
Ministers cannot make law unless under PA
Judicial review is very lengthy therefore can be very stressful and that there is no guarantee of it being successful