header-logo header-logo

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

At the core of the law

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll