header-logo header-logo

14 March 2019 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 7832 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Challenging the balance of power (Pt 2)

In his second update, Simon Parsons examines the possible grounds to challenge the public law decisions taken by public bodies

  • Grounds of judicial review: illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety.

See 'Challenging the balance of power (Pt 1)here

Decisions of public bodies are liable to challenge by way of judicial review and may be quashed as ultra vires (beyond the powers) by reference to the ordinary principles of English public law. The jurisdiction of the court is supervisory and not appellate thus judicial review looks at legality, not merits (the quality of the decision) it cannot (supposedly) provide the applicant with a substitute decision as the decision is for government.

Substantive hearing stage

In Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] A C 374 HL (the GCHQ case) Lord Diplock identified (at 410-411) three grounds of judicial review as: 

  • Illegality -where a public body abuses its power. (Substantive ultra vires).
  • Irrationality -unreasonableness- a decision that defies logic- a decision
  • 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

    NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

    NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

    From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

    Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

    Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

    Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

    Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

    Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

    Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

    NEWS
    A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
    FIFA’s 2026 Men's World Cup is already mired in controversy, with complaints over ‘excessive prices’ and opaque ticketing. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dr Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys warns that governing bodies may face scrutiny under EU competition law, with allegations of a ‘dominant—if not monopolistic—position’ in ticket sales
    Ten years after Brexit, UK and EU trade mark regimes are drifting apart in practice if not principle. Writing in NLJ this week, Roger Lush and Lara Elder of Carpmaels & Ransford highlight tighter UK scrutiny after SkyKick, where overly broad filings may signal ‘bad faith’
    A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
    Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
    back-to-top-scroll