Administration Law Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Administration Law - Case Study ExampleIn civil proceedings the misgiving of what is a adequate engross is a question of fact and degree taking into account on the whole the circumstances of the case R. v Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex p National Federation of ego Employed and Small Businesses Ltd 1982.Where a claimant is not directly affected by the action once the salute is satisfied that (s)he is not simply a meddlesome busybody1 then it tries to balance the claimants interest against the human race importance of the issues and the remedy sought. The term interest includes any connection between the claimant and the matter to which the claim relates. In R v depository of State for the Environment Ex p Rose Theatre swear Ltd 1990 it was held that a desire to protect an historic site was not sufficient only an unsuccessful applier could appeal against a planning stopping point. Conversely the courts found a sufficient interest when a public spirited citizen sought judicia l review of a serious public issue R. v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Ex p Lord Rees-Mogg 1994.The Law Commission disapproved of the decision in the Rose Theatre case recommending that public interest applications be treated as having sufficient interest. ... We are therefore confident that BSS will be able to give way sufficient interest both within the context of vindicating the rule of honor and that there is no other responsible challenger of the plaza Secretarys decision. Having said this beneath CPR 54.17 the court has discretion to hear any person, which would allow the BSS to submit try on the issue, if not to actually commence the action for judicial review.(b) Generally judicial review is bear on with the lawfulness of the decision making process of public bodies to ensure that powers behave not been abused or exceeded. BSS would have to establish that in reaching a decision the Home Secretary had erred in law in this manner. In Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service 1985 (the GCHQ case) Lord Diplock enumerated the categories under which judicial review might be soughta) Illegality b) Irrationality c) Procedural impropriety ord) advertise development on a case by case basis - particularly with regard to the ruler of proportionality which will be important under Human Rights and EU administrative law.BSS could attempt to establish that the Home Secretary has acted illegally as he has misunderstood his powers under the law. For example we are told that BB has had cardinal prison sentences each of which exceeded 9 months, and that by paragraph 9 of the Entry to the UK Rules, BB therefore would not ordinarily be allowed admittance to the UK. The purpose of the rule seems to be to unequivocally exclude from this country persons who have been convicted anywhere of a criminal offences exceeding 9 months in duration. This would imply that the Home Secretary does not have discretion in the matter . However, we note that the Home