Q1.
‘Judicial review leaves too much discretion to the judges. It is the executive, not the courts, which is tasked with the business of government.’ Critically discuss this statement

Q2.
‘To claim that judicial review stems from the will of Parliament is little more than a constitutional fiction. The ultra vires doctrine is incapable of explaining the real nature and scope of modern judicial review.’
Consider the extent to which you agree with this statement.

Requirement
Examine the debate amongst academics on whether or not ultra vires is the basis for judicial review (Forsyth, Craig, Oliver). The critique of ultra vires includes points such as it does not explain review of non-statutory powers and bodies (CCSU, Datafin) or how the ouster clause in Anisminic was circumvented.

Q3.
The National Clown Association (NCA) is a self-regulatory body made up of professional clowns within the UK. The NCA lays down a Code of Conduct for its members. A disciplinary committee (DC) hears complaints against individuals alleged to have breached the Code of Conduct; it has the power to expel clowns found guilty of serious misdemeanours. Clumsy is the NCA’s current President; Shifty is the DC’s presiding officer.

Upon hearing about a vicious ringside attack by Grumpy against Dozy (both members of the NCA), Clumsy sends a letter to Grumpy stating ‘This is a final warning. The NCA will not take any formal action against you on this occasion, but if there are further instances of violence, we will treat them very seriously’. Soon after, Dozy lodges a complaint against Grumpy. At an emergency meeting, the DC decides to expel Grumpy from the NCA with immediate effect. Shifty refuses to discuss the detailed reasons for that decision, on the grounds that it might expose frightened witnesses to retaliation by Grumpy.

Shifty recently applied for a job at the same large touring circus that Dozy sometimes works with.

Advise Grumpy as to his rights under administrative law and possible remedies via Part 54 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Q4.
Redbrick University Student Radio (RUSR) have been informed by the Vice-Chancellor of Redbrick University that they must drop their interview with the university’s former Director of Campus Services. The interview was intended to cover the subject of the contract with Kopf plc to take over the delivery of campus services for the university. Failure to comply will mean that the University will seek an injunction in the High Court to stop the broadcast. In addition it will also exercise its powers under the University Charter to withdraw RUSR’s funding, use of university buildings and facilities and initiate disciplinary proceedings against students who were working on this story as well as the management committee of RUSR for bringing the university into disrepute. The university says that the former Director of Campus Services is not only making inaccurate statements about the contract negotiations, but is also disclosing commercially sensitive details which were confidential.

The RUSR Management Committee believe that the interview contains accurate information about the contract negotiations including payment made to two members of the University’s Senior Management Team to award the contract to Kopf plc.
They seek your legal advice on whether they could successfully oppose an injunction relying on the Human Rights Act 1998.

Q1. ‘Judicial review leaves too much discretion to the judges....