header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010 / Julia Marlow , Charles Brasted
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Matters of fact

Charles Brasted & Julia Marlow highlight the significance of a decision being quashed due to mistake of fact

The recent Court of Appeal case of Connolly & Havering LBC v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government [2009] EWCA Civ 1059 is a rare example of a decision being quashed on the basis of unfairness arising as a result of a mistake of fact, adding to the possibility that this could become an important ground in the future.

Traditional wariness

The court has long been reluctant to allow an application for judicial review on the basis of a mistake of fact, considering factual questions to be the domain of the public body in question. There is, however, some evidence (to which Connolly adds) that, as the court’s scrutiny of administrative decisions has become more intense, some of that reluctance has also begun to diminish.

The difficulty with allowing applications for judicial review on the basis of mistake of fact was usefully summarised in E v Secretary of State for the Home

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll