header-logo header-logo

At the core of the law

03 July 2015 / Telha Arshad , Dervla Simm
Issue: 7659 / Categories: Features , Judicial review , Public
printer mail-detail
nlj_7659_marlow

Dervla Simm & Telha Arshad address proportionality as a standalone ground for judicial review at common law

One of the core grounds for challenging administrative decision-making by way of judicial review is that the decision is so unreasonable as to be unlawful. However, the English common law has increasingly shown signs of moving away from the reasonableness threshold embodied in the Wednesbury test ( Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223, [1947] 2 All ER 680) in favour of a more intense and structured European-style proportionality review. The recent decision in Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 19, [2015] All ER (D) 266 (Mar) suggests that a common law proportionality-style assessment is now firmly on the judicial review menu, even beyond the spheres of human rights and EU law.

The story so far: proportionality & Convention rights

The principle of proportionality has been integral to the jurisprudence of the European Courts for some time. In the 1988

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll