DISCLOSURE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW - adminlaw.org.uk.docVIP

  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
DISCLOSURE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW - adminlaw.org.uk.doc

DISCLOSURE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW James Maurici “The fact that ordinarily there is no disclosure [in judicial review] is the overriding feature in relation to costs. The parties simply put forward the documents upon which they rely, subject to any direction by the court that some specific document or group of documents should be disclosed. During the eight years that I sat as an Administrative Court judge, I was not aware of the absence of disclosure becoming a source of injustice. Nor (so far as I can recollect) did counsel ever suggest that this was the case.” (Civil Litigation Costs Review Preliminary Report by Lord Justice Jackson May 2009, chapter 7, para. 2.3) DISCLOSURE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PRE-TWEED It is well known that the traditional position in judicial review was that: the defendant has a “duty of candour” (see e.g. Belize Alliance v Department of the Environment [2004] UKPC 6; R (Quark Fishing) v SS Foreign Commonwealth Affairs [2002] EWCA Civ 1409 at [50] and R v Lancashire CC, ex p Huddleston [1986] 2 All ER 941 “it is a process to be conducted with all the cards face up on the table”); there was no general duty of inspection, disclosure etc. in judicial review unlike other civil litigation; the ordering of specific disclosure in judicial review was rare. This would generally only be ordered where it was shown that the defendant’s evidence was inaccurate, inconsistent or incomplete: see e.g. R v SSE, ex p Islington BC [1997] JR 121 at 126 and 128 – 129 and R v Secretary of State for Foreign Commonwealth Affairs, ex p WDM [1995] 1 WLR 286 at 396. As the quotation above indicates Jackson LJ considered the general absence of disclosure in judicial review as an overriding feature of the procedure which helped to limit costs. TWEED – IMPLICATIONS (i) the decision in Tweed Of course, now the starting point for understanding the requirements for disclosure in relation to judicial review is Tweed v Parades Commission [2006] UKHL 53; [2007] 1 AC 650. In Tweed

文档评论(0)

1983987115 + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档