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.

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)

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.

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.

Protestations to Parliament for Remeid of Law

2009 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. FORD
Keyword(s):  
Private Law ◽  
Civil Court ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Way

The Articles of Union approved by the parliaments of Scotland and England in 1707 provided for the preservation of the private law of Scotland and for the determination of disputes arising north of the border in Scottish courts. At the same time, however, the Articles not only allowed for the amendment of the law by legislation enacted at Westminster but also left open the possibility of appeals being made to the British parliament against decisions delivered in Scottish courts. The Articles did not allow explicitly for appeals, but nor did they prohibit them, and dissatisfied litigants, by exercising the privilege asserted in the Claim of Right to protest for remeid of law against decisions of the lords of council and session, enabled the upper house of the new parliament to substitute its decisions for those delivered by the supreme civil court in Scotland. This much has long been understood by historians of Scots law, as has the significant impact the opinions expressed by English judges in the House of Lords came to have on the development of the modern law. Yet what has never been properly understood is the nature of the protestations for remeid of law from which appeals to the British parliament emerged. Detailed study of these protestations in the years before and immediately following the union reveals that they were conceived of in several different ways and that their nature was never clearly defined. Nevertheless, it also tends to confirm that there is some basis for the common suspicion that appeals were not intended to be made to the House of Lords in the way that they have been.

Dissent and Toleration: Lord Stanhope's Bill of 1789

1978 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-73
Author(s):  
G. M. Ditchfield
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political History ◽  
Religious Toleration ◽  
Religious Change ◽  
The Third ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Law ◽  
Roman Catholics ◽  
The Way

It is widely accepted among historians that the House of Lords in the eighteenth century was an obstacle to religious change. Its unfriendly mien appears to be confirmed by the fate of several Quaker tithe bills and Dissenting petitions. Despite the passage of limited relief acts for Roman Catholics and Dissenters in 1778 and 1779 respectively, it was unusual for such legislation to be well received, or even to find a sponsor, in that chamber. Yet, in the summer of 1789 the House of Lords and that House alone witnessed what has been a neglected episode in ecclesiastical and political history. This was the attempt by the third earl Stanhope to amend the law concerning religious toleration. Although admittedly far from an exception to the rule in the way in which it was greeted by the peers, it has received scant notice from modern historians of toleration. Stanhope himself, of course, has become known to the historically minded as one of the celebrated eccentrics of the period; the image of ‘Citizen Stanhope’ the defender of the French Revolution and the ‘minority of one’ is unlikely to be effaced. Accordingly such discussion as there has been of the earl's bill has tended to emphasise Stanhope's personal idiosyncrasies and peculiar brand of aristocratic radicalism rather than the detailed provisions of the measure.

Mistake in the Law of Theft

1977 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-85
Author(s):  
Glanville williams
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Law ◽  
Complex Question ◽  
The Way

A person who receives property under an apparent contract of sale can be guilty of theft of what he receives if the contract is void, for mistake or otherwise. It seems, since the decision of the House of Lords in Lawrence, that a person who obtains a voidable title (title under a voidable contract) can be similarly guilty (assuming, as always, that the other essentials of theft are present). I argue else where that a person who obtains a valid title to property generally does not by doing so make a dishonest appropriation (even though he may be morally dishonest), and should not be guilty of theft. The object of this article is to consider the way in which these principles apply to transfers made under mistake.In Lawrence the defendant's title to the money was voidable for fraud, which induces a degree of mistake by the transferor; but other sources of mistake are possible. The transferor may make a spontaneous mistake, or a mistake resulting from the transferee's innocent misrepresentation, without fraud.Three legal results can follow from a mistake in transferring property, according to circumstances.(1) The mistake may avoid the transaction, preventing title from passing. The transferee can be guilty of theft of the property on ordinary principles, that is to say by applying the definition in section 1 (1) of the Theft Act 1968.(2) The mistake may make the transaction voidable, so that a voidable title passes. Precisely when the transferee commits theft is a complex question, which will be postponed for the time being.

Speeding-Up Innovation with Business Hackathons

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Myrna FLORES ◽  
Matic GOLOB ◽  
Doroteja MAKLIN ◽  
Christopher TUCCI
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Short Period ◽  
User Centric ◽  
Specific Challenge ◽  
Innovation Outcomes ◽  
The Way

In recent years, the way organizations innovate and develop new solutions has changed considerably. Moving from ‘behind the closed doors’ style of innovating to open innovation where collaboration with outsiders is encouraged, organizations are in the pursuit of more effective ways to accelerate their innovation outcomes. As a result, organizations are establishing creative and entrepreneurial ecosystems, which not only empower employees but also involve many others to co-create new solutions. In this paper, we present a methodology for organizing hackathons, i.e. competition-based events where small teams work over a short period of time to ideate, design, prototype and test their ideas following a user-centric approach to solve a specific challenge. This paper also provides insights into two different hackathons organized in the United Kingdom, and Mexico, as well as a series of 5 hackathons organized in Argentina, Mexico, Switzerland, United Kingdom and in Senegal.

Prawne aspekty eutanazji w Holandii

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-253
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Stefanowicz
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Dutch Society ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Limited Length ◽  
The Law ◽  
Death On Demand ◽  
The Way

This article undertakes to show the way that has led to the statutory decriminalization of euthanasia-related murder and assisted suicide in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. It presents the evolution of the views held by Dutch society on the euthanasia related practice, in the consequence of which death on demand has become legal after less than thirty years. Due attention is paid to the role of organs of public authority in these changes, with a particular emphasis put on the role of the Dutch Parliament – the States General. Because of scarcity of space and limited length of the article, the change in the attitudes toward euthanasia, which has taken place in the Netherlands, is presented in a synthetic way – from the first discussions on admissibility of a euthanasia-related murder carried out in the 1970s, through the practice of killing patients at their request, which was against the law at that time, but with years began more and more acceptable, up to the statutory decriminalization of euthanasia by the Dutch Parliament, made with the support of the majority of society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document