header-logo header-logo

11 August 2011 / Natsai Manyarara
Issue: 7478 / Categories: Features , Judicial review , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Permission to review

Natsai Manyarara examines the amenability of judicial review of the Upper Tribunal

The Supreme Court considered the scope of judicial review available to unappealable decisions of the Upper Tribunal established by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (TCEA 2007) in its recent judgment in Cart. The debate centred upon the effect of the creation of a new and integrated tribunal structure under TCEA 2007. It was argued on behalf of the respondent that the Upper Tribunal was not amenable to judicial review other than in the wholly exceptional circumstances of an outright excess of jurisdiction or a procedural irregularity which denied the right to a fair hearing.

The Supreme Court rejected this approach and held that the same test as for second appeals should be applied by the High Court in considering applications for permission to bring a judicial review claim against an unappealable decision of the Upper Tribunal (see R (on the application of Cart) (Appellant) v The Upper Tribunal (Respondent); R (on the application of MR (Pakistan) (FC) (Appellant) v The

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll