Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Public law topic 9
JR preliminary requirements - Coggle Diagram
- Public law topic 9
- JR preliminary requirements
Amenability
-
Most JR cases will involve decision taken by 'classic public body' (eg central govt dept/local govt/executive agency) exercising statutory powers (sometimes exercising prerogative power eg CCSU): i.e. a public body carrying out a public function
Some additional types of decisions are amenable to JR - decisions taken by other types of bodies but which have (the necessary) public element attached to them
Case law See (eg) Datafin; ex p Insurance Services plc; ex p Percival; ex p Aga Khan; ex p Wachmann; ex p Goldsmith; Partnerships In Care
Procedural exclusivity
- (Effectively a sub-issue of amenability)
- Modern position: Courts are more flexible on this point where there is a mixture of public and private law issues
- If a public law decision is being challenged, it must be by JR; private matters should be dealt with by civil action
-
Standing
- What is 'sufficient interest'? Generous conception of standing - trend towards liberalisation in area of standing
- Individuals (person or legal entity). Do not have to be directly affected by the issue. Can include 'concerned citizen'
- Q - who can challenge a decision by JR? Test: Senior Courts Act 1981 s.31(3): 'sufficient interest in the matter'. Not further defined in SCA. Directly and adversely affected?
- Groups. Can include associations/representative groups (i.e. associations of indivs who are affected by a particular decision taken by a public body), and pressure groups
Case law See (eg) 'Fleet Street Casuals'; ex p Liverpool Taxi Fleet Operators Ass'n; ex p Rose Theatre Trust; ex p Greenpeace; ex p World Development Movement; ex p Rees-Mogg; 'Worboys' case
Time limit
-
Claim for JR must be filed (a) promptly (b) in any event no later than 3 months after grounds for claim first arose
-
-
Ouster clauses
Admin law courts do not like complete ouster clauses (because on their face, they exclude the jurisdiction of the court from conducting a JR).
-
What is it? A clause 'written into' a statute which seeks to prevent JR challenges of the exercise of the relevant statutory power
Limitation/'partial ouster' clause?
Courts are less resistant to this as it doesn't exclude JR completely.
-