100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
PQ on Standing, Fettering and Reasonableness £2.79
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Cambridge University (CAM)
  4.  
  5. Law
  6.  
  7. Administrative law

Essay

PQ on Standing, Fettering and Reasonableness
 0 purchase

Good PQ response for judicial review question involving standing, collateral challenge, fettering of discretion and reasonableness.

Preview 1 out of 3  pages

Document information

  • July 17, 2017
  • 3
  • 2015/2016
  • Essay
  • Unknown
  • I//2i

Subjects

Written for

All documents for this subject (5)

Seller

avatar-seller
christan1911

Reviews received

Content preview

CHRIS TAN HOMERTON SUPERVISION 7 PQ
Jed should challenge the revocation as he was denied the chance to defend himself and
his legitimate expectations may have been ignored. If he is charged under the Hazardous
Business Act 2015 for operating a designated Hazardous Business without a license, he
can try using collateral challenge. The Radioactivity Concern Alliance (RAC) may
challenge the decision to treat Abbey’s business as non-hazardous on rationality grounds
but they may have standing issues.
Jed
Right to Make Representations
J has a right to notice that his license may be revoked: Kanda v Government of Malaya. Per
Lord Denning, ‘If the right to be heard is a real right which is worth anything, it must carry
with it a right in the accused man to know the case which is made against him’. However,
in this case, it appears that his license was simply revoked on the basis on uncorroborated
allegations of an unnamed employee, and J had no chance to directly challenge the
revocation, nor were any independent investigations undertaken by the relevant
Department. The fact that the employee was not named in itself is acceptable as long as
this was necessary and proportionate to protect the employee’s identity (which is
normally the case with whistle blowers): in Roberts v Parole Board, it was lawful to do
this to protect the safety of Roberts’ informant, a fellow prisoner.
Per Ridge v Baldwin, this is a breach of natural justice and J has a right to be heard. J may
not have a right to make representations in person. Like in Lloyd v McMahon, oral, as
opposed to written, representations would not add anything. An oral hearing would only
serve to potentially establish J’s sincerity and good faith in complying with environmental
regulations. However, these are often technical and detailed regulations which may be
better proved through scientific data.
When making representations, J should say he had a legitimate expectation for the license
to continue for the duration of its grant. In Schmidt, Lord Denning said that an alien had
no right to expect leave to remain to be granted as this is discretionary. However, where
leave to remain has already been granted, there is a legitimate expectation that the leave
to remain will not be revoked without good reason. A license is similar to leave to remain
in this context: there is no expectation that a license should be granted to a business
designated as hazardous but some procedural protection would be due to a license
already granted a license. This is the standard of review applied in Ng Yuen Shiu.
Collateral Challenge
Collateral challenge is clearly illustrated by Boddington. Where someone is charged with
criminal offences under laws or regulations which were not validly enacted, then they
have not committed any offence. Hence, if J is charged under the Act for operating a
designated business without a license, he may wish to challenge the decision using
collateral challenge from two angles.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller christan1911. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £2.79. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

65004 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now

Start selling
£2.79
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added