levo

Human Rights: Enforcement

The grounds for judicial review

  • 3 things to know
  • A2 Units 3 and 4

Overview

Illegality as a ground of review, decision taken for an improper purpose and taking an irrelevant consideration into account.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Numbers

Which case gave the irrationality test its name?

Key term

What are the two limbs of natural justice?

Key term

What is a legitimate expectation?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    Which case classified the grounds of judicial review?

    Model answer

    Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985), in which Lord Diplock grouped them as illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety.

  2. 2

    What is meant by illegality as a ground of review?

    Model answer

    The decision-maker must correctly understand the law regulating the power and give effect to it, so acting beyond the power or misdirecting itself in law makes the decision unlawful.

  3. 3

    Give an example of a decision taken for an improper purpose.

    Model answer

    In Padfield v Minister of Agriculture (1968) a refusal to refer a complaint to a committee, made in order to avoid political embarrassment, was unlawful because it frustrated the policy of the Act.

  4. 4

    What is meant by taking an irrelevant consideration into account?

    Model answer

    A decision is unlawful where the body relies on a factor the statute does not permit it to weigh, as where a council banned hunting on its land on moral grounds under a power to manage land for the benefit of its area.

  5. 5

    What is fettering of discretion?

    Model answer

    Applying a policy so rigidly that the body shuts its mind to whether an exception ought to be made in the individual case before it.

  6. 6

    State the test of irrationality.

    Model answer

    A decision is irrational if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority, properly directing itself in law, could ever have reached it.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

Roles v Nathan ( ).
196319411945

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe defendant owed the victim a duty of care and breached it.
BThe breach carried a reasonably foreseeable risk of death.
CThe breach caused the death.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Pecuniary loss is financial and measurable.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Human Rights: Enforcement, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.