R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Self ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Inland Revenue ◽  
National Federation ◽  
Liberal Approach

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as the Fleet Street Casuals case). This case concerns when and how an assessment of an applicant’s standing (or interest, locus standi) should be made for the purposes of determining whether they may bring a judicial review. Lord Diplock’s judgment provided a liberal approach to the assessment of standing as compared with the approaches offered by his fellow judges. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Self ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Inland Revenue ◽  
National Federation ◽  
Liberal Approach

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals). This case concerns when and how an assessment of an applicant’s standing (or interest, locus standi) should be made for the purposes of determining whether they may bring a judicial review. Lord Diplock’s judgment provided a liberal approach to the assessment of standing as compared with the approaches offered by his fellow judges. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Self ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Inland Revenue ◽  
National Federation ◽  
Liberal Approach

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals). This case concerns when and how an assessment of whether an applicant seeking to bring a judicial review should occur. Lord Diplock’s judgment provided a liberal approach to the assessment of standing. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Webb
Keyword(s):  
Small Businesses ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Self ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Inland Revenue ◽  
National Federation

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of the Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1982] AC 617, House of Lords (also known as Fleet Street Casuals). The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

16. Locus Standi

2021 ◽  
pp. 428-446
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Small Businesses ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Choice Of Procedure ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Short Period ◽  
National Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Practical Sense ◽  
The Way

This chapter focuses on the concept of locus standi, perhaps the most important way in which administrative law deals with the question of how to balance the protection of individual citizens’ rights and interests with the desire to ensure that government decision-making remains within legal limits and that government bodies (including the courts) are protected from vexatious litigants. It is organised as follows. The first section addresses the law that existed prior to the introduction of the Order 53 reforms in 1977 whilst the second covers the short period between the introduction of those reforms and the House of Lords’ decision in IRC v National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses. The third section runs from the mid-1980s to the present day. The pervasive analytical concerns are to explore the way the law of locus standi interacts with the question of the choice of procedure issues which were addressed in chapter fifteen, and—more broadly—to assess how those two matters both singly and in combination structure in a practical sense the way our constitution gives effect to the various values inherent in theories relating to the rule of law and sovereignty of Parliament.

16. Locus Standi

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Government Decision ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Short Period ◽  
National Federation

This chapter focuses on the concept of locus standi, perhaps the most important way in which administrative law deals with the question of how to balance the protection of individual citizens’ rights and interests with the desire to ensure that government decision-making remains within legal limits and that government bodies (including the courts) are protected from vexatious litigants. It is organised as follows. The first section addresses the law that existed prior to the introduction of the Order 53 reforms in 1977 whilst the second covers the short period between the introduction of those reforms and the House of Lords’ decision in IRC v National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses. The third section runs from the mid-1980s to the present day.

15. Introduction to judicial review

2021 ◽  
pp. 356-374
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Executive Action ◽  
And Control ◽  
Public Bodies

This chapter looks at the purpose and constitutional significance of judicial review. Where public bodies overreach themselves by acting unlawfully, the judicial review process allows individuals to hold public bodies to account in the courts, ensuring that governmental and public powers are lawfully exercised. This maintains the rule of law by helping to protect the public from the arbitrary or unreasonable exercise of government power. Judicial review is therefore a powerful check and control by the courts on executive action, but it also raises issues of whether the process gives the judiciary too much power over the elected government. There are three preliminary or threshold issues that a claimant needs to satisfy when bringing a judicial review claim. To be amenable to judicial review, the claim must raise a public law matter; it must be justiciable; and the claimant must have standing (locus standi).

Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374, House of Lords (also known as the GCHQ Case)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
House Of Lords

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374, House of Lords (also known as the GCHQ case). This case note discusses both the ‘new nomenclature’ (Lord Roskill at 415) of judicial review established by Lord Diplock, and the House of Lords’ conclusion that prerogative powers are, in principle, reviewable by the courts. There is also discussion of the deployment of national security arguments to avoid review. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

scholarly journals Standing to litigate in the public interest in Lesotho: The case for a liberal approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hoolo 'Nyane ◽  
Tekane Maqakachane
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Liberal Approach

In Lesotho, standing to litigate is still based on the private law doctrine of locus standi in judicio. This doctrine requires the person who institutes an action in a court of law, regardless of whether it is in the private or public interest, to satisfy the court that he or she is directly and substantially interested in the outcome of the decision. Section 22(1) of the Constitution of Lesotho provides that any person who alleges that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution has been violated 'in relation to him' may approach the court of law for redress. Although the Constitution is silent about the enforcement of the other non-Bill of Rights parts of the Constitution, the courts have readily invoked section 22(1) to exclude litigants who are not 'directly and substantially' interested in the outcome of the case. This restrictive approach notwithstanding, a more liberal approach has been adopted in pockets of public law decisions of the superior courts in Lesotho. The purpose of this article is to amplify this liberal approach. The article argues that constitutional democracy in Lesotho will benefit from a liberal approach as opposed to a restrictive approach to standing. This is supported by a discernible movement in modern-day public law towards a more liberal approach to standing.

CONFIDENTIALITY AND PUBLIC AUTHORITIES: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, LEGALITY AND DISCLOSURE FOR STATUTORY FUNCTIONS

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-256
Author(s):  
Oliver Michael Butler
Keyword(s):  
Small Businesses ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Fundamental Part ◽  
History Of ◽  
Inland Revenue ◽  
National Federation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Vital Element

TAXPAYER confidentiality has a long history of protection in the UK. It is a fundamental part of the tax system. It has been considered invaluable by the executive for the efficient collection of taxation, protected by Parliament since the Income Tax Act 1799 and recognised by the courts as a “vital element in the working of the system” (Inland Revenue Commissioners v National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd. [1982] A.C. 617, 633, per Lord Wilberforce).

Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374, House of Lords (also known as the GCHQ Case)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
House Of Lords

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374, House of Lords (also known as the GCHQ case). This case note discusses both the ‘new nomenclature’ (Lord Roskill at 415) of judicial review established by Lord Diplock, and the House of Lords’ conclusion that prerogative powers are, in principle, reviewable by the courts. There is also discussion of the deployment of national security arguments to avoid review. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document