header-logo header-logo

07 March 2019 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 7831 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Challenging the balance of power

In the first part of a series of three articles, Simon Parsons investigates judicial review of executive action

  • Challenging the power of public bodies.
  • Judicial review as a remedy of last resort.
  • Principles of English public law.
  • Procedural matters.
  • Decisions of public bodies can be challenged by way of judicial review and may be quashed as ultra vires (beyond its powers). Following the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) into domestic law many judicial reviews concern the abuse of Convention rights.

    When determining whether governmental action is legal and valid, the administrative court is exercising what is known as an inherent jurisdiction, ie it derives from the common law and not from statute. The judges are very quick to resist any attempts to curtail this jurisdiction because it gives effect to the underlying values of judicial review that is the rule of law and the separation of powers. The rule of law requires that those who exercise governmental power comply with minimum standards of good

    If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
    If you are already a subscriber sign in
    ...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

    MOVERS & SHAKERS

    Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

    Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

    Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

    DWF—Stephen Webb

    DWF—Stephen Webb

    Partner and head of national planning team appointed

    mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

    mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

    Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

    NEWS
    Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
    The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
    The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
    The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
    A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
    back-to-top-scroll