Sentences with phrase «for a judicial review if»

Under the bill CCTV cameras will fall under a statutory code of conduct, with citizens able to apply for a judicial review if they believe they are being used inappropriately.

These days the remedies for people who feel that the Home Office has misapplied the law or failed to properly assess their case are far more limited; basically a right to a second pair of Home Office eyes reviewing their application followed by an application for judicial review if their pockets are sufficiently deep to finance their own legal team and face the significant costs that may be sought by government lawyers if their claim fails.

Not exact matches

An appeal on the merits is not available for Tribunal merger authorisation decisions, but the ACCC is seeking judicial review, alleging three reviewable errors, including that the Tribunal erred in its reasoning that «it could only conclude that the proposed acquisition was likely to result in a detriment if the Tribunal concluded that there would be a substantial lessening of competition».

«I inadvertently suggested to you that clause 64 contains a provision for the court to grant permission to proceed with a judicial review where conduct is highly likely to have not made a difference if it considered there were exceptional circumstances to do so.

Even if you can afford a judicial review, reforms will make it easier for public bodies to escape a full examination of whether or not they behaved in accordance with law.

If that was to happen, the next best option available would be to apply to the high court for a judicial review, a process the government itself says can be «complex, expensive and time - consuming».

Grayling claimed that courts would still be able to grant permission for judicial review cases under the new so - called «highly likely» restrictions if there were «exceptional circumstances».

If the buildings are approved as part of a «deficient process,» the letter warned, our clients (local tenants and two not - for - profit groups), «will exercise their right to seek judicial review.»

If the FOIA Coordinator denies a request, the FOIA Coordinator will explain the reasons for denying the request, that is, either the public record is exempt from disclosure or the public record does not exist and will inform the requesting party of the right to appeal the denial to the Webberville Community Schools Board or seek judicial review.

If a FOIA request is denied by the FOIA coordinator, the FOIA coordinator must send a written notice containing the reasons for denial and explain the right to submit a written appeal to the Webberville Community Schools Board or seek judicial review in court.

If this did not happen, the alliance said it would seek leave to apply for a judicial review.

(d) If any State is dissatisfied with the Secretary's action under subsection (b) or (c) of this section, such State may appeal to the United States district court for the district where the capital of such State is located and judicial review of such action shall be on the record in accordance with the provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code.

And Pastika promised if the central government ignores Balinese dissatisfaction, DPRD (a regional parliament) will propose judicial review for this law.

The legal test used by the Court to determine the choice of a legal basis (if there are multiple) for the signing and conclusion of international agreements is well known: the choice must rest on objective factors that are amenable to judicial review and these include the aim and content of that measure (the context also matters in relation to international agreements).

The Court has often said, indeed for example in this case, that «the choice must rest on objective factors that are amenable to judicial review and these include the aim and content of that measure», also stating that, if there are multiple legal bases, the legislation should be based on the dominant legal basis (if recourse to a dual legal basis is not possible).

The proposals, if implemented, will have the effect that many migrants and prisoners will no longer be eligible for legal aid; access to judicial review will be restricted; contracts for criminal work will be the subject of competitive tendering; and fees paid to legal aid solicitors and barristers will be reduced, by more than 50 % in some instances.

If you want to keep the option of judicial review open, you are still responsible for meeting the deadline for filing a judicial review.

- In judicial review cases, legal aid will only be paid for the work carried out if the High Court grants permission for the case to proceed.

If you have a right to appeal to WCB's review division or the Workers Compensation Appeal Tribunal, you must do that before filing for judicial review.

If the government goes outside the two - person shortlist, Galati may well amend his application for judicial review to contend, for example, that he has a legitimate expectation that the government will finish a process it gave a «clear, unambiguous and unqualified» undertaking to complete.

If you decide to proceed with a judicial review, this guide will help you prepare for court, show you how interim stays of evictions work (a stay will put an eviction on hold), tell you how you should properly serve documents to parties, how to file the judicial review and how you can apply for fee waivers.

Most Canadian provinces provide for judicial oversight of prenuptial agreements but the standard of judicial review varies from province to province For example: - Ontario's Family Law Act permits a court to set aside a prenuptial agreement or any portion thereof if a party failed to disclose significant assets or liabilities, if a party did not understand the nature or consequences of the contract, or otherwise, in accordance with the law of contrafor judicial oversight of prenuptial agreements but the standard of judicial review varies from province to province For example: - Ontario's Family Law Act permits a court to set aside a prenuptial agreement or any portion thereof if a party failed to disclose significant assets or liabilities, if a party did not understand the nature or consequences of the contract, or otherwise, in accordance with the law of contraFor example: - Ontario's Family Law Act permits a court to set aside a prenuptial agreement or any portion thereof if a party failed to disclose significant assets or liabilities, if a party did not understand the nature or consequences of the contract, or otherwise, in accordance with the law of contract.

However, if an application for forfeiture is concluded before judicial review proceedings, then this will provide no effective remedy.

However, if the decision to dismiss is prima facie amenable to judicial review, the conclusion of Court of Appeal that proceedings in the ET would not be as effective for Shoesmith may be harder to challenge.

If the concern is that search warrants are too time consuming, then appropriate resources should be put in place to provide for rapid review by independent judicial officers.

For this reason, where a church or religious body asserts, because of its ethos, that religious belief constitutes a genuine occupational requirement for employment, it must at least «be possible for such an assertion to be the subject, if need be, of effective judicial review by which it can be ensured that the criteria set out in Article 4 (2) of that directive are satisfied in the particular case.&raqFor this reason, where a church or religious body asserts, because of its ethos, that religious belief constitutes a genuine occupational requirement for employment, it must at least «be possible for such an assertion to be the subject, if need be, of effective judicial review by which it can be ensured that the criteria set out in Article 4 (2) of that directive are satisfied in the particular case.&raqfor employment, it must at least «be possible for such an assertion to be the subject, if need be, of effective judicial review by which it can be ensured that the criteria set out in Article 4 (2) of that directive are satisfied in the particular case.&raqfor such an assertion to be the subject, if need be, of effective judicial review by which it can be ensured that the criteria set out in Article 4 (2) of that directive are satisfied in the particular case.»

The court should be slow to entertain an application for judicial review as an alternative to an appeal by way of case stated just because the time limit for an appeal has been missed, even if the fault lies with the claimant's solicitors rather than with the claimant personally.

I point out as an initial point that this is unlikely to take place, in any event, for two main reasons: first, the Charter of Values would have to be adopted by the legislature — not an easy task in light of the minority position of the PQ; second, even if it is adopted, Quebec could still invoke the Canadian Charter's section 33 notwithstanding clause, to shield the new provisions from judicial review.

Two questions arose: (i) whether s 204 contained an express requirement under which the county court was required by an enactment to make a decision applying the principles that were applied by the court on an application for judicial review, thus placing s 204 appeals within the public law category; and (ii) if not, whether there were any other reasons requiring the application of judicial review principles with the result that s 204 appeals fell within the post-LASPO 2012 civil legal aid regime.

Defence of judicial review challenges, from initial pre-action stages to final hearing and, if need be, appeal for health, education and local authorities.

So long as there is some basis for an inference — in other words, the particular inference is reasonably open — even if that inference appears to have been drawn as a result of illogical reasoning, there is no place for judicial review because no error of law has taken place.»

Tipping J acknowledged that judicial review should not be excluded lightly by a statutory ouster clause but said that the statutory challenge proceeding «has a built - in right for the taxpayer to take the matter to the High Court, if that is thought necessary or desirable».

If the procedural exclusivity issue is to take firm root then it will matter; time limits in judicial review are tight and the scope for judicial remedies narrow, whereas the ills of the child support scheme for all concerned with it are many and varied.

If we had not petitioned the court for a judicial review of the adjudicator's decision, our client would be stuck with a knowing that one of our key arguments had not even been taken into consideration

R (Feakins) v. Secretary of State (CA)[2004] 1 WLR 1761 An applicant for judicial review had standing to make the application even though he had indicated he would accept the decision under challenge if he was paid a sufficient sum of money.

If you seek judicial review, you can not simply ask for a re-hearing of your case.

If your judicial review will take more than 2 hours and is scheduled for a specific date (see Scheduling a Court Hearing), you should give the judge a copy of your written argument so that she or he can follow it while you speak.

If you decide to proceed with a judicial review, this guide will help you prepare for court, tell you how to apply for fee waivers, how to file the judicial review, how you should properly serve documents to parties and how you can apply for fee waivers.

If you are considering an application for judicial review, we recommend reading Dunsmuir.

Olswang partner, Dan Tench, who acted for the newspapers, says: «The judge noted that the public interest in judicial review proceedings was if anything greater than that in private law proceedings and that there was no good reason to deny the same degree of public access to the key court documents.»

Of more interest to data protection specialists, the Judge ruled that if he had found a breach of the DPA 1998, he would not have refused relief on the grounds that the C could have brought an ordinary Part 7 claim for breach of the Act, rather than an application for judicial review.

If an appeal is unsuccessful, a person may ask to apply for judicial review by the Federal Court of Canada.

If an application for an extension is denied, the only recourse for an applicant is through an application at the Federal Court of Canada for judicial review.

Between 2013 and February 2017, if you, an individual, had an environmental judicial review, then you could pretty much guarantee that your liability to the other side's costs would be capped at # 5,000 (# 10,000 for companies) if you lost, and your recovery of your own costs would be limited to # 35,000 if you won.

You can apply for judicial review only if you have been through the public body's own complaints and appeal procedures and are still unhappy with the decision made.

If approved, a judicial panel will review applicants and forward three names to the governor for approval.

First, if effective supervision by the courts is the rationale for the duty to give reasons, wouldn't a duty arise in any case where the underlying decision is subject to judicial review (which, nowadays, is more or less all decisions)?

This also raises an important question for tribunal decision makers: if implicit reasons are important enough to ground a decision on judicial review, why are they not important enough to make explicit in the original decision?

The bottom line, despite these complications, is clear: if you think that, for a given type of case, the benefits of judicial review are greater than the costs, you favour judicial review.

Indirect operational costs consist of the resources that are expended due to the existence of judicial review, but not on judicial review as such — for example, the time that I spend on writing this post, and the time you expend on reading it, which might have been spent on more socially productive (if not more enjoyable!)