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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

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