header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Challenging the balance of power (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
14 March 2019 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 7832 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

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

    Read All
    Sponsored by
    FOIL—Bridget Tatham

    FOIL—Bridget Tatham

    Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

    Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

    Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

    Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

    Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

    Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

    Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

    NEWS
    Read All
    Solicitors at increasing risk of violence
    Solicitors are installing panic buttons and thumb print scanners due to ‘systemic and rising’ intimidation including death and arson threats from clients
    Government U-turns on plans for day one rights
    Ministers’ decision to scrap plans for their Labour manifesto pledge of day one protection from unfair dismissal was entirely predictable, employment lawyers have said
    NLJ this week: Divorce meets digital wealth
    Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
    NLJ this week: Pets, probate & public access—civil law’s busy winter
    NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
    NLJ this week: Cyber drills build real-world resilience
    Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
    Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
    back-to-top-scroll