Judicial review handbook /
Fordham, Michael,
Judicial review handbook / Michael Fordham ; foreword by Lord Woolf. - Sixth edition. - xx, 869 pages : forms ; 25 cm
Previous ed.: 2008.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Machine generated contents note: NATURE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: keys to understanding what the Court is doing -- constitutional guarantee. Judicial review is the rule of law in action: a fundamental and inalienable constitutional protection -- Constitutional supervision of public authorities -- Judicial review and the rule of law -- Judicial review's constitutional inalienability -- Supervisory jurisdiction. Judicial review is a well-established supervisory role by the Court over public bodies -- supervisory jurisdiction -- Importance and range of subject-matter -- Judicial review in other Courts and Tribunals -- Administrative Court in action: some special features -- Procedural discipline and firm case-management -- Basic steps in a judicial review case -- Impact. A successful claim does not necessarily guarantee a favourable ultimate outcome, nor a wider knock-on effect -- Remittal and repeatability -- Hollow/counterproductive victories -- Judicial review as a monetary springboard -- Securing assurances/provoking comment -- Wider impact/knock-on effect -- Materiality. A claim may fail if lacking substance, as where non-material, non-prejudicial, futile, academic or premature -- Practical substance and judicial review -- Materiality/material flaw -- Lack of prejudice -- Futility -- Dangers of materiality, prejudice and futility -- Hypothetical/academic issues: utility -- Prematurity -- Targets. A wide range of measures, acts, decisions, policies and omissions can be the subject of a judicial review challenge -- Judicial review and "decisions" -- Spectrum of possible targets -- Multiple targets/target-selection -- Power sources. Public bodies' powers and duties can arise under or by reference to EU and domestic legislation, common law or prerogative, policy guidance or international law -- Powers/duties: basic sources -- Policy guidance -- International law -- Constitutional fundamentals. Core common law principles can constitute fundamentals of the UK's unwritten constitution -- Legislative supremacy -- Rule of law/separation of powers -- Access to justice -- Constitutional/common law rights/duties -- Basic fairness/natural justice -- Basic reasonableness -- EU law. Domestic statutes, rules and decisions must be compatible with applicable EU legislation and legal principle -- EU law supremacy -- EU Treaty rights -- Judicial review for EU-incompatibility -- Reference to the CJEU -- EU law damages/reparation -- EU Charter of Fundamental Rights -- HRA. Domestic legislation must be read, and public authorities must act, compatibly with HRA:ECHR rights -- HRA: key features and themes -- Codified Convention rights -- HRA s.2: relationship with Strasbourg -- HRA s.3: compatible interpretation -- HRA s.6: compatible public authority action -- HRA just satisfaction -- Cooperation & candour. The Court will expect from all parties cooperative behaviour and candid disclosure -- cooperative enterprise -- ADR/mediation -- Claimant's duty of candour -- Defendant/interested party's duty of candour -- Precedent & authority. Judicial precedent can bind or guide the court; academic and comparative analysis may be persuasive -- Use of case-law -- Academic commentary/comparative case-law -- Reviewing primary legislation. Courts have restricted functions of assessing legal compatibility of Acts of Parliament -- Primary legislation: disapplication under EU law -- HRA s.4: declaration of incompatibility -- Judicial review of primary legislation at common law -- Restraint. Courts adopt a primary self-restraint, preserving for public bodies a latitude for judgment and discretion -- "Soft" review: reasonableness -- Restraint and factual questions -- Restraint and discretion/judgment -- Restraint and expertise -- Judicial restraint in action -- Protecting public authorities -- Review from the decision-maker's point of view -- Balancing. Judicial review principles are a careful evolving equilibrium serving the dual imperatives of vigilance and restraint -- Judicial review and striking a balance -- Striking a balance: grounds for judicial review -- Striking a balance: nothing personal -- Convenience and floodgates -- forbidden method. Judges will not intervene as if matters for the public body's judgment were for the Court's judgment -- "Soft" review: the forbidden substitutionary approach -- "Not an appeal" -- "Legality not correctness" -- "Not the merits" -- "Court does not substitute its own judgment" -- Hard-edged questions. There are certain matters which the Court considers afresh for itself, imposing its own judgment -- Hard-edged review: correctness -- Precedent fact -- Error of law as hard-edged review -- Interpretation as a hard-edged question -- Procedural fairness as hard-edged review -- Hard-edged review: further matters -- Evidence and fact. Judicial review is generally conducted on written evidence and regarded as an unsuitable forum for resolving factual disputes, though this can be appropriate and necessary -- Judicial review evidence -- Fresh evidence in judicial review -- Judicial review and factual disputes -- Disclosure, further information and cross-examination -- Costs. Generally, the loser must pay the winner's costs -- Costs: general matters -- Costs and the permission stage -- Costs and the public interest -- Costs and discontinuance/early disposal -- Special costs responses -- Making the claim. Where pre-claim correspondence fails, claims are to be made and acknowledged in the prescribed way -- Pre-claim steps -- Making the claim -- Acknowledging the claim -- Interim remedies. The Court can make orders securing a particular state of affairs pending final resolution of the claim -- Interim remedies -- balance of convenience -- Permission. The claimant must obtain permission for judicial review, by prompt and candid papers disclosing an arguable case -- Granting or refusing permission -- Case-management at the permission stage -- Substantive hearing. At the hearing the Court decides whether there are grounds for intervening and whether to grant a remedy -- Post-permission/pre-hearing steps -- Third party participation -- Disposal without a hearing -- substantive hearing -- Appeal. An appeal lies from the Administrative Court's decisions (except the grant of permission) -- Permission-stage appeals -- Substantive appeals -- Nature of the Court of Appeal's approach -- Remedies. The Court has discretionary power to quash, mandate, prevent and clarify -- remedial toolkit -- declaration -- Remedy as a discretionary matter -- remedies in action -- Monetary remedies. Judicial review embraces damages, debt and restitution, HRA "just satisfaction" and EU reparation; but a broader financial response to maladministration awaits development -- Availability of debt, restitution and damages -- Recognised species of monetary claim -- Public law reparation: no damages for maladministration -- PARAMETERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: further dominant themes shaping the law and practice -- Delay. Claims must be prompt (3 months in an EU case); undue delay can be fatal to permission or (if prejudicial) a remedy -- approach to delay -- Promptness and the running of time -- Good reason to extend time -- Hardship, prejudice and detriment -- Public/private. Judicial review is the (normally non-exclusive) application of "public law" principles to "public" functions -- public/private distinction -- Public law principles outside CPR -- Procedural exclusivity/abuse of process -- Ouster. Head-on statutory exclusion of judicial review is theoretically possible but constitutionally dubious -- Ousting judicial review: a hostile climate -- Time-limit ousters -- Interpretation. Discerning the true meaning of legislative and other relevant sources is vital to effective judicial review -- purposive approach to interpretation -- Legislative purpose and judicial review -- Statutory interpretation -- Using Hansard -- Interpreting other sources -- Function. It is essential to understand the role and responsibilities of the decision-maker under review -- Understanding the defendant's function -- Traditional functional labels -- judicial/administrative distinction -- Other aspects of function -- Context. Context being everything, the Court will always respond to the nature and circumstances of the individual case -- Contextualism -- Circumstances -- Characteristics and conduct of the claimant -- Claimant's failure to complain/raise the concern at the time -- "Flexi-principles" -- Modified review. Matters may involve part-availability of judicial review; or restricted or enhanced grounds. A. P1. 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. P2. 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. P3. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. P4. 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. P5. 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. P6. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. P7. 7.1. 7.2. 7.3. 7.4. 7.5. 7.6. P8. 8.1. 8.2. 8.3. 8.4. 8.5. 8.6. P9. 9.1. 9.2. 9.3. 9.4. 9.5. 9.6. P10. 10.1. 10.2. 10.3. 10.4. P11. 11.1. 11.2. P12. 12.1. 12.2. 12.3. P13. 13.1. 13.2. 13.3. 13.4. 13.5. 13.6. 13.7. P14. 14.1. 14.2. 14.3. 14.4. P15. 15.1. 15.2. 15.3. 15.4. 15.5. P16. 16.1. 16.2. 16.3. 16.4. 16.5. 16.6. P17. 17.1. 17.2. 17.3. 17.4. P18. 18.1. 18.2. 18.3. 18.4. 18.5. P19. 19.1. 19.2. 19.3. P20. 20.1. 20.2. P21. 21.1. 21.2. P22. 22.1. 22.2. 22.3. 22.4. P23. 23.1. 23.2. 23.3. P24. 24.1. 24.2. 24.3. 24.4. P25. 25.1. 25.2. 25.3. B. P26. 26.1. 26.2. 26.3. 26.4. P27. 27.1. 27.2. 27.3. P28. 28.1. 28.2. P29. 29.1. 29.2. 29.3. 29.4. 29.5. P30. 30.1. 30.2. 30.3. 30.4. P31. 31.1. 31.2. 31.3. 31.4. 31.5. P32.
1849461597 9781849461597
Judicial review--England
Judicial review--Wales
Judicial review of administrative acts--Great Britain--Digests
KD4902 / .F67 2012
347.42012
Judicial review handbook / Michael Fordham ; foreword by Lord Woolf. - Sixth edition. - xx, 869 pages : forms ; 25 cm
Previous ed.: 2008.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Machine generated contents note: NATURE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: keys to understanding what the Court is doing -- constitutional guarantee. Judicial review is the rule of law in action: a fundamental and inalienable constitutional protection -- Constitutional supervision of public authorities -- Judicial review and the rule of law -- Judicial review's constitutional inalienability -- Supervisory jurisdiction. Judicial review is a well-established supervisory role by the Court over public bodies -- supervisory jurisdiction -- Importance and range of subject-matter -- Judicial review in other Courts and Tribunals -- Administrative Court in action: some special features -- Procedural discipline and firm case-management -- Basic steps in a judicial review case -- Impact. A successful claim does not necessarily guarantee a favourable ultimate outcome, nor a wider knock-on effect -- Remittal and repeatability -- Hollow/counterproductive victories -- Judicial review as a monetary springboard -- Securing assurances/provoking comment -- Wider impact/knock-on effect -- Materiality. A claim may fail if lacking substance, as where non-material, non-prejudicial, futile, academic or premature -- Practical substance and judicial review -- Materiality/material flaw -- Lack of prejudice -- Futility -- Dangers of materiality, prejudice and futility -- Hypothetical/academic issues: utility -- Prematurity -- Targets. A wide range of measures, acts, decisions, policies and omissions can be the subject of a judicial review challenge -- Judicial review and "decisions" -- Spectrum of possible targets -- Multiple targets/target-selection -- Power sources. Public bodies' powers and duties can arise under or by reference to EU and domestic legislation, common law or prerogative, policy guidance or international law -- Powers/duties: basic sources -- Policy guidance -- International law -- Constitutional fundamentals. Core common law principles can constitute fundamentals of the UK's unwritten constitution -- Legislative supremacy -- Rule of law/separation of powers -- Access to justice -- Constitutional/common law rights/duties -- Basic fairness/natural justice -- Basic reasonableness -- EU law. Domestic statutes, rules and decisions must be compatible with applicable EU legislation and legal principle -- EU law supremacy -- EU Treaty rights -- Judicial review for EU-incompatibility -- Reference to the CJEU -- EU law damages/reparation -- EU Charter of Fundamental Rights -- HRA. Domestic legislation must be read, and public authorities must act, compatibly with HRA:ECHR rights -- HRA: key features and themes -- Codified Convention rights -- HRA s.2: relationship with Strasbourg -- HRA s.3: compatible interpretation -- HRA s.6: compatible public authority action -- HRA just satisfaction -- Cooperation & candour. The Court will expect from all parties cooperative behaviour and candid disclosure -- cooperative enterprise -- ADR/mediation -- Claimant's duty of candour -- Defendant/interested party's duty of candour -- Precedent & authority. Judicial precedent can bind or guide the court; academic and comparative analysis may be persuasive -- Use of case-law -- Academic commentary/comparative case-law -- Reviewing primary legislation. Courts have restricted functions of assessing legal compatibility of Acts of Parliament -- Primary legislation: disapplication under EU law -- HRA s.4: declaration of incompatibility -- Judicial review of primary legislation at common law -- Restraint. Courts adopt a primary self-restraint, preserving for public bodies a latitude for judgment and discretion -- "Soft" review: reasonableness -- Restraint and factual questions -- Restraint and discretion/judgment -- Restraint and expertise -- Judicial restraint in action -- Protecting public authorities -- Review from the decision-maker's point of view -- Balancing. Judicial review principles are a careful evolving equilibrium serving the dual imperatives of vigilance and restraint -- Judicial review and striking a balance -- Striking a balance: grounds for judicial review -- Striking a balance: nothing personal -- Convenience and floodgates -- forbidden method. Judges will not intervene as if matters for the public body's judgment were for the Court's judgment -- "Soft" review: the forbidden substitutionary approach -- "Not an appeal" -- "Legality not correctness" -- "Not the merits" -- "Court does not substitute its own judgment" -- Hard-edged questions. There are certain matters which the Court considers afresh for itself, imposing its own judgment -- Hard-edged review: correctness -- Precedent fact -- Error of law as hard-edged review -- Interpretation as a hard-edged question -- Procedural fairness as hard-edged review -- Hard-edged review: further matters -- Evidence and fact. Judicial review is generally conducted on written evidence and regarded as an unsuitable forum for resolving factual disputes, though this can be appropriate and necessary -- Judicial review evidence -- Fresh evidence in judicial review -- Judicial review and factual disputes -- Disclosure, further information and cross-examination -- Costs. Generally, the loser must pay the winner's costs -- Costs: general matters -- Costs and the permission stage -- Costs and the public interest -- Costs and discontinuance/early disposal -- Special costs responses -- Making the claim. Where pre-claim correspondence fails, claims are to be made and acknowledged in the prescribed way -- Pre-claim steps -- Making the claim -- Acknowledging the claim -- Interim remedies. The Court can make orders securing a particular state of affairs pending final resolution of the claim -- Interim remedies -- balance of convenience -- Permission. The claimant must obtain permission for judicial review, by prompt and candid papers disclosing an arguable case -- Granting or refusing permission -- Case-management at the permission stage -- Substantive hearing. At the hearing the Court decides whether there are grounds for intervening and whether to grant a remedy -- Post-permission/pre-hearing steps -- Third party participation -- Disposal without a hearing -- substantive hearing -- Appeal. An appeal lies from the Administrative Court's decisions (except the grant of permission) -- Permission-stage appeals -- Substantive appeals -- Nature of the Court of Appeal's approach -- Remedies. The Court has discretionary power to quash, mandate, prevent and clarify -- remedial toolkit -- declaration -- Remedy as a discretionary matter -- remedies in action -- Monetary remedies. Judicial review embraces damages, debt and restitution, HRA "just satisfaction" and EU reparation; but a broader financial response to maladministration awaits development -- Availability of debt, restitution and damages -- Recognised species of monetary claim -- Public law reparation: no damages for maladministration -- PARAMETERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: further dominant themes shaping the law and practice -- Delay. Claims must be prompt (3 months in an EU case); undue delay can be fatal to permission or (if prejudicial) a remedy -- approach to delay -- Promptness and the running of time -- Good reason to extend time -- Hardship, prejudice and detriment -- Public/private. Judicial review is the (normally non-exclusive) application of "public law" principles to "public" functions -- public/private distinction -- Public law principles outside CPR -- Procedural exclusivity/abuse of process -- Ouster. Head-on statutory exclusion of judicial review is theoretically possible but constitutionally dubious -- Ousting judicial review: a hostile climate -- Time-limit ousters -- Interpretation. Discerning the true meaning of legislative and other relevant sources is vital to effective judicial review -- purposive approach to interpretation -- Legislative purpose and judicial review -- Statutory interpretation -- Using Hansard -- Interpreting other sources -- Function. It is essential to understand the role and responsibilities of the decision-maker under review -- Understanding the defendant's function -- Traditional functional labels -- judicial/administrative distinction -- Other aspects of function -- Context. Context being everything, the Court will always respond to the nature and circumstances of the individual case -- Contextualism -- Circumstances -- Characteristics and conduct of the claimant -- Claimant's failure to complain/raise the concern at the time -- "Flexi-principles" -- Modified review. Matters may involve part-availability of judicial review; or restricted or enhanced grounds. A. P1. 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. P2. 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. P3. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. P4. 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. P5. 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. P6. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. P7. 7.1. 7.2. 7.3. 7.4. 7.5. 7.6. P8. 8.1. 8.2. 8.3. 8.4. 8.5. 8.6. P9. 9.1. 9.2. 9.3. 9.4. 9.5. 9.6. P10. 10.1. 10.2. 10.3. 10.4. P11. 11.1. 11.2. P12. 12.1. 12.2. 12.3. P13. 13.1. 13.2. 13.3. 13.4. 13.5. 13.6. 13.7. P14. 14.1. 14.2. 14.3. 14.4. P15. 15.1. 15.2. 15.3. 15.4. 15.5. P16. 16.1. 16.2. 16.3. 16.4. 16.5. 16.6. P17. 17.1. 17.2. 17.3. 17.4. P18. 18.1. 18.2. 18.3. 18.4. 18.5. P19. 19.1. 19.2. 19.3. P20. 20.1. 20.2. P21. 21.1. 21.2. P22. 22.1. 22.2. 22.3. 22.4. P23. 23.1. 23.2. 23.3. P24. 24.1. 24.2. 24.3. 24.4. P25. 25.1. 25.2. 25.3. B. P26. 26.1. 26.2. 26.3. 26.4. P27. 27.1. 27.2. 27.3. P28. 28.1. 28.2. P29. 29.1. 29.2. 29.3. 29.4. 29.5. P30. 30.1. 30.2. 30.3. 30.4. P31. 31.1. 31.2. 31.3. 31.4. 31.5. P32.
1849461597 9781849461597
Judicial review--England
Judicial review--Wales
Judicial review of administrative acts--Great Britain--Digests
KD4902 / .F67 2012
347.42012