We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 50

The "exclusivity principle" in a planning context

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 27 2011

The Court of Appeal has held that the service of a breach of planning condition notice is a "purely public" act, so the correct way of challenging such a notice is by way of judicial review proceedings

Disclosure and cross-examination of witnesses in judicial review cases

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 13 2009

In R (Al-Sweady and Others) v Secretary of State for Defence 2009 EWHC 2387 (Admin), the High Court found that where the outcome of a judicial review application might depend on the determination of a factual dispute, the court should give urgent consideration to ordering disclosure and cross-examination

Quashing a decision on the basis of material error of fact

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 30 2010

In R (March) v Secretary of State for Health 2010 EWHC 765 (Admin), Mr Justice Holman in the High Court quashed on the grounds of material error of fact a decision by the Secretary of State concerning the level of ex gratia payments made to NHS patients treated with contaminated blood

Coverage under a public liability insurance policy: taking a commercial approach

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 15 2008

The judgment of Mr Justice Walker in Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable 2008 EWHC 1375 (Comm) provides guidance on the interpretation of and liabilities covered under public liability insurance policies

Parties to judicial review: who is 'interested'?

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 1 2010

In R (on the application of McVey) v Secretary of State for Health 2010 EWHC 1225 (Admin) the High Court held that, in judicial review proceedings, it has no jurisdiction to hear interested third parties who cease to be directly affected by a claim

Office of Government Commerce v Information Commissioner

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 2 2008

The recent High Court case Office of Government Commerce v Information Commissioner has shed some light on the interface between the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("FOIA") and the doctrine of Parliamentary privilege, and the High Court's interpretation of the exemptions in section 33 and section 35 of FOIA

Court of Appeal emphasises the difficulty of public authorities escaping contractual commitments on the basis of ultra vires arguments

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 6 2010

In Rose Gibb v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust 2010 EWCA Civ 678, the Court of Appeal (Laws LJ giving the leading judgment) overruled a decision by the High Court that a Compromise Agreement entered into by the defendant Trust to secure an early termination of its former Chief Executive's employment was ultra vires and therefore unenforceable

Interim relief in judicial review claims

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 16 2010

The ruling of the Administrative Court in Leeds Unique Education Ltd and AA Hamilton College Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2010 EWHC 1030 (Admin) considers the circumstances when it may be appropriate to grant interim relief in judicial review claims

Withdrawing licences: procedural unfairness and human rights

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 29 2010

In R (on the application of the London Reading College Limited) v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2010 EWHC 2561 (Admin), the High Court upheld a complaint that the Secretary of State had acted in a procedurally unfair manner by revoking a licence

Legitimate expectations vs statutory duty

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 21 2011

Can a legitimate expectation override a statutory duty? Can a Court which finds that a public authority acted irrationally grant relief that would override a statutory duty? These issues were addressed by the Court of Appeal recently in Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences v The Albert Court Residents Association and Others and Westminster City Council 2011 EWCA Civ 430

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy