THIS PAPER IS NOT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE EXAMINATION HALLS

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON LA3008 October

DIPLOMA IN THE COMMON LAW

LLB

ALL SCHEMES AND ROUTES

BSc DEGREES WITH LAW

Administrative Law

Friday 28 October 2016: 10.00 – 13.15

Candidates will have THREE HOURS AND FIFTEEN MINUTES in which to

answer the questions.

Candidates should answer FOUR of the following EIGHT questions.

Candidates should answer all parts of a question unless otherwise stated.

Permitted materials
None.

© University of London 2016

UL16/0658
Page 1 of 3
1. In what circumstances, and for what reasons, will the courts allow a
person to challenge the lawfulness of a government decision other than
by way of a claim for judicial review under s.31 of the Senior Courts Act
1981?

2. Would it be beneficial for English administrative law to be more

receptive to the general principles of law propounded by the European
Court of Justice?

3. “The way in which English courts have differentiated between unlawful

decisions which are held to be void ab initio and those which are held
to be only voidable seems to owe far more to a judicial desire to
achieve just results in a particular case than to the development of a
clear doctrinal principle.”

Discuss.

4. Assess the proposition that developments in the law on locus standi

since 1980 have lent a far more rigorous character to our modern
understanding of the rule of law.

5. In what circumstances, and for what reasons, will a court prevent a

government body from changing a decision it has already made?

6. “Wednesbury ‘was an unfortunately retrogressive decision in English

administrative law, in so far as it suggested that there are degrees of
unreasonableness and that only a very extreme degree can bring an
administrative decision within the legitimate scope of judicial
invalidation’.” per Lord Cooke in R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the
Home Department (2001).

In the light of Lord Cooke’s comment, to what extent would you agree
with the contention that English administrative should recognise
proportionality as a ground of review in respect of all government
decisions?

UL16/0658
Page 2 of 3
7. Giving evidence to a Commons Select Committee in 2014, the Scottish
Public Service Ombudsman suggested that:

“[T]he model in England is stuck in time. It probably was good for its
time, but I think its time has passed.”

Explain and discuss what weaknesses may be perceived in the

functioning of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
mechanism.

8. The (fictitious) Isle of Wight Bridge Act 2015, enacted by the UK

Parliament, authorizes the making of regulations by the Secretary of
State for the use of the new bridge linking the Isle of Wight to the
mainland, which may include provisions about charges and conditions
of use. The regulations are to be made by statutory instrument, and
regulations have been issued in the name of the Secretary of State for
Transport.

Advise whether affected persons might challenge the regulations

successfully on any of these grounds:

(a) that the relevant statutory instrument has not been on sale in the
month since it was made, because of an industrial dispute that
has prevented it being printed;

(b) that the content of the regulations was determined by a civil

servant in the Department for Communities and Local
Government and not by the apparent signatory;

(c) that the regulations, which involve high charges for motor
cyclists, are irrational, notwithstanding their approval in the two
Houses of Parliament; and

(d) that the regulations, which allow bridge officials to carry out
random searches of users in hope of preventing illegal drugs
being brought to the island, are disproportionate.

END OF PAPER

UL16/0658
Page 3 of 3