header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
14 March 2019 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 7832 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Challenging the balance of power (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

In his second update, Simon Parsons examines the possible grounds to challenge the public law decisions taken by public bodies
  • Grounds of judicial review: illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety.

See 'Challenging the balance of power (Pt 1)' here

Decisions of public bodies are liable to challenge by way of judicial review and may be quashed as ultra vires (beyond the powers) by reference to the ordinary principles of English public law. The jurisdiction of the court is supervisory and not appellate thus judicial review looks at legality, not merits (the quality of the decision) it cannot (supposedly) provide the applicant with a substitute decision as the decision is for government.

Substantive hearing stage

In Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] A C 374 HL (the GCHQ case) Lord Diplock identified (at 410-411) three grounds of judicial review as: 

  • Illegality -where a public body abuses its power. (Substantive ultra vires).
  • Irrationality -unreasonableness- a decision that defies logic- a decision that no sensible person who had applied his mind to
    • If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
    If you are already a subscriber sign in
    ...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

    MOVERS & SHAKERS

    Read All
    Sponsored by
    Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

    Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

    Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

    Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

    Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

    Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

    Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

    Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

    Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

    NEWS
    Read All
    Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925

    NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

    HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

    NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
    Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar
    Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
    NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
    From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
    NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
    Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
    NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
    Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
    Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
    back-to-top-scroll