Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1968205
Kimberley Ziya
2. There have been two cases dealing with the court’s jurisdiction pursuant to R (Hamid) v Secretary of State for the Home Department in the context of urgent applications. The Hamid case provided for a procedure by which the court could ask a legal representative – whether a solicitor or counsel – to show cause why the conduct of the legal representative should not be considered for referral to their respective regulatory body or otherwise be admonished.
{"title":"Developments in Judicial Review Practice and Procedure 2021","authors":"Kimberley Ziya","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1968205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1968205","url":null,"abstract":"2. There have been two cases dealing with the court’s jurisdiction pursuant to R (Hamid) v Secretary of State for the Home Department in the context of urgent applications. The Hamid case provided for a procedure by which the court could ask a legal representative – whether a solicitor or counsel – to show cause why the conduct of the legal representative should not be considered for referral to their respective regulatory body or otherwise be admonished.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130755160","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1980306
Ben Du Feu
{"title":"Clauses 1 and 2 of the Judicial Review and Courts Bill","authors":"Ben Du Feu","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1980306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1980306","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122930392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1980305
C. Bishop
In deciding complaints under article 14, four questions arise: (i) Does the subject matter of the complaint fall within the ambit of one of the substantive Convention rights? (ii) Does the ground upon which the complainants have been treated differently from others constitute a ‘status’? (iii) Have they been treated differently from other people not sharing that status who are similarly situated or, alternatively, have they been treated in the same way as other people not sharing that status whose situation is relevantly different from theirs? (iv) Does that difference or similarity in treatment have an objective and reasonable justification, in other words, does it pursue a legitimate aim and do the means employed bear ‘a reasonable relationship of proportionality’ to the aims sought to be realised (see Stec v United Kingdom (2006) 43 EHRR 47, para 51)?
在决定根据第14条提出的申诉时，会产生四个问题:(i)申诉的主题事项是否属于《公约》实质性权利之一的范围?(ii)申诉人受到与其他人不同待遇的理由是否构成“地位”?(iii)他们是否受到了与其他没有相同地位的人不同的待遇，或者，他们是否受到了与其他没有相同地位的人相同的待遇，而这些人的情况与他们有很大的不同?(iv)这种待遇上的差异或相似是否有客观合理的理由，换句话说，它是否追求一个合法的目标，所采用的手段是否与寻求实现的目标具有“合理的比例关系”(见Stec v United Kingdom (2006) 43 EHRR 47，第51段)?
{"title":"Article 14 ECHR in the Supreme Court","authors":"C. Bishop","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1980305","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1980305","url":null,"abstract":"In deciding complaints under article 14, four questions arise: (i) Does the subject matter of the complaint fall within the ambit of one of the substantive Convention rights? (ii) Does the ground upon which the complainants have been treated differently from others constitute a ‘status’? (iii) Have they been treated differently from other people not sharing that status who are similarly situated or, alternatively, have they been treated in the same way as other people not sharing that status whose situation is relevantly different from theirs? (iv) Does that difference or similarity in treatment have an objective and reasonable justification, in other words, does it pursue a legitimate aim and do the means employed bear ‘a reasonable relationship of proportionality’ to the aims sought to be realised (see Stec v United Kingdom (2006) 43 EHRR 47, para 51)?","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121526844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1969841
Haddon-Cave
2. I would like to pay tribute to the work of Gresham College and in particular to the extraordinary resource that it makes available to us all in the form of 1,800 free public lectures available online stretching back nearly 40 years to Lord Scarman’s lecture ‘Human Rights and the Democratic Process’. For some of us who have not got out much recently, it has been a source of comfort and stimulation, in addition to trying to figure out the BBC series Line of Duty.
2. 我想对格雷辛学院的工作表示敬意，特别是它为我们所有人提供了1800个免费的在线公开讲座，这些讲座可以追溯到近40年前斯卡曼勋爵的讲座“人权与民主进程”。对于我们这些最近不怎么出门的人来说，除了试着看懂BBC的电视剧《职守》(Line of Duty)外，它还是一种安慰和刺激的来源。
{"title":"English Law and Descent into Complexity","authors":"Haddon-Cave","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1969841","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1969841","url":null,"abstract":"2. I would like to pay tribute to the work of Gresham College and in particular to the extraordinary resource that it makes available to us all in the form of 1,800 free public lectures available online stretching back nearly 40 years to Lord Scarman’s lecture ‘Human Rights and the Democratic Process’. For some of us who have not got out much recently, it has been a source of comfort and stimulation, in addition to trying to figure out the BBC series Line of Duty.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121930425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1968204
K. Wong
1. Hong Kong is facing a grim future, as the sweeping National Security Law unilaterally imposed by Beijing takes root and government crackdowns on an unprecedented scale cause consternation within and beyond. All the prominent pro-democracy figures are now either in prison or in exile for dissent. One of them, Ted Hui, had been charged with multiple offences, including perverting the course of justice, for trying in vain to mediatebetweenwarringcitizensat theheightof the (admittedly sometimesviolent)protests in the latter half of 2019. Hehas since been forced into exile, fleeingfirst toDenmark with the aid ofDanish parliamentarians, then briefly to London, and now finally settling in Australia. In so doing he has had to abscond bail granted by a magistrate.
{"title":"‘Fugitive from Injustice’: The Common Law and Human Rights Bases of the Continuing Right of Judicial Review While in Exile from Hong Kong","authors":"K. Wong","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1968204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1968204","url":null,"abstract":"1. Hong Kong is facing a grim future, as the sweeping National Security Law unilaterally imposed by Beijing takes root and government crackdowns on an unprecedented scale cause consternation within and beyond. All the prominent pro-democracy figures are now either in prison or in exile for dissent. One of them, Ted Hui, had been charged with multiple offences, including perverting the course of justice, for trying in vain to mediatebetweenwarringcitizensat theheightof the (admittedly sometimesviolent)protests in the latter half of 2019. Hehas since been forced into exile, fleeingfirst toDenmark with the aid ofDanish parliamentarians, then briefly to London, and now finally settling in Australia. In so doing he has had to abscond bail granted by a magistrate.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117279122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10854681.2021.1985393
Mikołaj Barczentewicz
Cart judicial reviews constitute the largest single group of claims for judicial review in the High Court. However, they are difficult to study because they rarely result in a High Court judgment and thus are reflected in the popular case law databases. I analysed the best public source of information on the fate of successful Cart judicial reviews: Upper Tribunal decisions following successful Cart claims from 2018 to 2020 selected programmatically from a dataset of over 42,000—mostly unreported—decisions. Thus, I can discuss the key aspects of successful Cart challenges, including the question what claims succeed in meeting the ‘second-tier appeals’ test for permission set in CPR 54.7A(7). This study complements previous quantitative work on rates of success in Cart and non Cart judicial reviews and contributes to the broader discussion on the appropriateness of retaining the Cart procedure in the context of the proposal to discontinue Cart claims made by the Independent Review of Administrative Law and adopted by the Government in the Judicial Review and Courts Bill.
{"title":"Cart Judicial Reviews through the Lens of the Upper Tribunal","authors":"Mikołaj Barczentewicz","doi":"10.1080/10854681.2021.1985393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2021.1985393","url":null,"abstract":"Cart judicial reviews constitute the largest single group of claims for judicial review in the High Court. However, they are difficult to study because they rarely result in a High Court judgment and thus are reflected in the popular case law databases. I analysed the best public source of information on the fate of successful Cart judicial reviews: Upper Tribunal decisions following successful Cart claims from 2018 to 2020 selected programmatically from a dataset of over 42,000—mostly unreported—decisions. Thus, I can discuss the key aspects of successful Cart challenges, including the question what claims succeed in meeting the ‘second-tier appeals’ test for permission set in CPR 54.7A(7). This study complements previous quantitative work on rates of success in Cart and non Cart judicial reviews and contributes to the broader discussion on the appropriateness of retaining the Cart procedure in the context of the proposal to discontinue Cart claims made by the Independent Review of Administrative Law and adopted by the Government in the Judicial Review and Courts Bill.","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131899608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1017/9781108870184.020
R. Krishnan, A. Bhaskar
{"title":"Article 142 of the Indian Constitution: On the Thin Line between Judicial Activism and Restraint","authors":"R. Krishnan, A. Bhaskar","doi":"10.1017/9781108870184.020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108870184.020","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130570085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1017/9781108870184.013
Oishik Sircar
{"title":"A Minor Jurisprudence of Pathos: Upendra Baxi as Teacher and Writer","authors":"Oishik Sircar","doi":"10.1017/9781108870184.013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108870184.013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130335940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1017/9781108870184.011
Yaniv Roznai, G. Jacobsohn
{"title":"Judicial Activism, Courts, and Constitutional Revolutions: The Israeli Case","authors":"Yaniv Roznai, G. Jacobsohn","doi":"10.1017/9781108870184.011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108870184.011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128785320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1017/9781108870184.017
Shruti Bedi
{"title":"The Power of Judicial Review: Judicial Chutzpah or Judicial Desideratum","authors":"Shruti Bedi","doi":"10.1017/9781108870184.017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108870184.017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":232228,"journal":{"name":"Judicial Review","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114219936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：