Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Unreasonableness - Coggle Diagram
Unreasonableness
-
-
oppressive decisions
where a decision imposes excessive hardship or an infringement on rights, which is unnecessary, the courts will consider if it is oppressive and therefore unreasonable
Wheeler v Leicester City Council- a ban to use grounds was imposed as a punishement on a football club for playing in south africa during apartheid. policy was unreasonably punitive as the club remained neutral on the matter
R v Secretary of State for Home Dept ex parte Norney- refusal to refer IRA prisoners to parole board was oppressive and therefore unlawful under 5(4) ECHR
Traditional
'wednesbury reasonableness': Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation- ‘if a decision on a competent matter is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it, then the courts can interfere’
reformulation
GCHQ- preferred ‘irrationality’ and applies to a decision that is ‘so outrageous in it’s defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it’
R v Devon CC ex parte G- irrationality approach casts doubt on mental capacity of the decision maker and is too high of a threshold
R v Chief Constable of Sussex ex parte International Trader’s Ferry shows disagreement with Wednesbury test and found it to be exaggerated. He simply asked whether the decision was ‘one which a reasonable authority could reach’