judicial review

• judicial review is a hearing in which the judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action by a public body exercising a public function - heard in the administrative court of the high court
• judicial review - only available when no other means of challenge are available
• if the action of the public has been made ultra vires then the court will declare it void
• anyone with an interest in the decision can bring an action

  it must be bought before a court/judge within 3 months
• a public body can be challenged on the basis of:

  • illegality
  • fairness
  • irrationality and proportionality
• illegality:

  • a public body given powers from an act of parliament can only do what the act says
  • any action that doesnt come from the act is unlawful and considered void
• fairness

  • must use powers fairly
  • not be biased and should be impartial
  • must be given a fair hearing
• irrationality and proportionality

  • if no reasonable authority would have made the same action then considered irrational
  • judge will balance the legitimate aim against the individuals rights
  • a decision of a public body that involved human rights, only needs to be proportional.
• types of ultra vires

  • procedural - aylesbury mushroom case
  • substantive - secratary of state vs ex parte Pfizer
  • unreasonableness - wednesbury case / R(Rogers) v NHS swindon trust
• remedies

  • damages
  • quashing order - overturning the action
  • prohibiting order - a court order stopping a public body's future actions
  • mandatory order - a court order making the public body follow the law