PL2 Lecture 3 -
Overview of Judicial Review Process
Permission Requirements
Public function
Time limits
Standing
Arguable case
Likelihood of substantially different outcome
Exhaustion of alternative remedies
Grounds for Review
Illegality
Reasonableness
Human Rights Act
Procedural impropriety and fairness
Justiciability
Determines the appropriateness of court reviewing an administrative decision.
Remedies
Justiciability Definition
Suitability of a case to be judicially reviewed.
Case Studies
Corner House Research
Case: R (Corner House Research) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2008] UKHL 60
Allegations against British Aerospace for bribery.
Threat by Saudi Arabia to cease anti-terrorism cooperation led to the DFSO not investigating.
High Court quashed this decision, but the House of Lords overturned it, emphasizing non-justiciability.
Al-Haq
Case: R (Al-Haq) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2009] EWHC 1910 (Admin)
Al-Haq requested a mandatory order for suspending military assistance to Israel.
High Court deemed foreign affairs decisions as executive-only, ruling against intervention.
Hammersmatch Properties
Case: First Secretary of State v Hammersmatch Properties Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 1360
A planning inspector's decision to preserve a building was quashed by the High Court but was reinstated by the Court of Appeal due to exceeding judicial powers over planning merits.
Ex p Hammersmith and Fulham LBC
Case: R v Environment Secretary, ex p Hammersmith and Fulham LBC [1991] 1 AC 521
Court ruled that policy merits of decisions by ministries are not subject to judicial review unless completely arbitrary.
Judicial Review and Resource Allocation
Emphasis on rational set of criteria for resource allocation, with courts ensuring decisions are not arbitrary.
Justiciability in Practice
The claim itself may be non-justiciable, or certain issues within the claim may not be.
A claim may proceed if it involves a mix of justiciable and non-justiciable issues.
Deference in Judicial Review
Judges show deference to initial decision-makers, requiring special reasons for court interference.
Reasons for Deference
Legislative delegation of powers
Expertise of decision-makers
Political accountability of decision-makers
Methods of information gathering by decision-makers
Case Analysis: R (Miranda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 6
Examined police detention and items seizure for national security.
Emphasized need for courts to defer to police expertise in assessing national security risks.
Criteria for Court Interference
Not a simple yes/no—a nuanced approach based on situation specifics.
Comparing expertise and political accountability of decision-makers versus courts.
Deference and Comity
Deference is not servility; it respects the separation of powers.
Lord Hoffman’s View
Court decisions on justiciability reflect legal authority, not mere deference.
Degrees of Deference
Complete deference: non-justiciability (e.g., national security)
Massive deference: parliamentary acts and funding allocations
Minimal deference: legal rights protection
Zero deference: unlawful actions.
Problem Question Analysis
Scenario: Adam's deportation claim due to national security concerns post-protest.
Considerations:
National Security and statutory powers
Political responsibility and expertise of the Home Secretary
Counterargument on reasonableness: assessing if the decision is irrational.