Is Wednesbury unreasonableness being overtaken by the upcoming ground of proportionality? Ayesha Riaz reports
- An examination of the topical debate between Wednesbury unreasonableness and proportionality and whether Wednesbury unreasonableness is being overtaken by the upcoming ground of proportionality.
- The degree of judicial intervention when applying the Wednesbury threshold is far lower than proportionality.
Despite the fact that both grounds for Judicial Review originate from distinct jurisprudential backgrounds—one from the English common law, the other from European human rights law— it is not uncommon for similarities to be drawn between Wednesbury unreasonableness and proportionality. The article seeks to explore the two grounds and then to analyse the differences between them.
What is the Wednesbury test?
This Wednesbury or irrationality test was developed in the seminal case of Associated Provincial Press Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1984] 1KB 223, and the threshold for unreasonableness is articulated by Lord Diplock in this very case as action 'so outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
