Judicial Review Handbook (Indian Reprint)

Writing in the fifth edition of this Handbook, author Michael Fordham described his ambition when writing the first edition (and indeed all subsequent editions) of this book as "to read as many judicial review cases as I could and to try to extract, classify and present illustrations and statements of principle."

Behind this aim lay the practitioner's overwhelming need to know and understand the case-law. Without it, as Fordham says "much can be achieved in public law through instinct, experience and familiarity with general principles which are broad, flexible and designed to accord with common sense." But with knowledge of the case law comes the vital ability to be able to point to and rely on an authoritative statement of principle and working illustration.

Knowing the case-law is crucial: "the challenge is to find it." This, the sixth edition of the Handbook, continues the tradition established by earlier editions in rendering the voluminous case-law accessible and knowable.

This Handbook remains an indispensable source of reference and a guide to the case-law in judicial review. Established as an essential part of the library of any practitioner engaged in public law cases, the Judicial Review Handbook offers unrivalled coverage of administrative law, including, but not confined to, the work of the Administrative Court and its procedures.

Once again completely revised and up-dated, the sixth edition approximates to a restatement of the law of judicial review, organised around 63 legal principles, each supported by a comprehensive presentation of the sources and an unequalled selection of reported case quotations. It also includes essential procedural rules, forms and guidance issued by the Administrative Court. As in the previous edition, both the Civil Procedure Rules and Human Rights Act 1998 feature prominently as major influences on the shaping of the case-law. Their impact, and the plethora of cases which explore their meaning and application, were fully analysed and evaluated in the previous edition, but this time around their importance has grown exponentially and is reflected in even greater attention being given to their respective roles.

Attention is also given to another new development - the coming into existence of the Supreme Court. Here Michael Fordham casts an experienced eye over the Court's work in the area of judicial review, and assesses the early signs from a Court that is expected to be one of the key influences in the development of judicial review in the modern era.

A. THE NATURE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:

keys to understanding what the Court is doing
P1. A constitutional guarantee
P2. Supervisory jurisdiction
P3. Procedural rigour & flexibility
P4. Materiality
P5. Targets
P6. Sources
P7. Constitutional fundamentals
P8. EU law
P9. The HRA
P10. Candour & cooperation
P11. Precedent & authority
P12. Reviewing primary legislation
P13. Judicial restraint
P14. Critical balance
P15. The forbidden method
P16. Hard-edged questions
P17. Evidence & fact
P18. Costs
P19. The claim stage
P20. Interim relief
P21. The permission stage
P22. The substantive stage
P23. Appeal
P24. Remedies
P25. Monetary remedies

B. PARAMETERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
further dominant themes shaping the law and practice
P26. Delay
P27. Public/private law
P28. Ouster
P29. Interpretation
P30. Function
P31. Context
P32. Modified review
P33. Flux
P34. Reviewability/non-reviewability
P35. Principle of legality
P36. Alternative remedy
P37. Proportionality method
P38. Standing
P39. Discretion/duty
P40. Inalienability
P41. Legitimate expectation
P42. Onus
P43. Severance
P44. Nullity

C. GROUNDS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW:
public law wrongs justifying the Court's intervention
P45. Classifying grounds
P46. Ultra vires
P47. Jurisdictional error
P48. Error of law
P49. Error of fact
P50. Abdication/fetter
P51. Insufficient inquiry
P52. Bad faith/improper motive
P53. Frustrating the legislative purpose
P54. Substantive unfairness
P55. Consistency/equal treatment
P56. Relevancy/irrelevancy
P57. Unreasonableness
P58. Proportionality
P59. HRA violation
P60. Constitutionality
P61. Procedural unfairness
P62. Consultation
P63. Bias
P64. Reasons
P65. External vitiation