We offer broad experience in
judicial review challenges before the Administrative Court and other courts and tribunals (including the Competition Appeal Tribunal, the Information Tribunal and the Court of First Instance as well as the European Courts).
Not exact matches
The Ministry of Justice plans to tighten the test that needs to be passed
before a
judicial review can be brought to
challenge decisions by the Government and public bodies» — The Times (#)
They were long out of time, probably, for
judicial review; but for reasons particular to each case had been unable, or had failed, to
challenge the assessments
before.
Simplified, one could conclude that while the negative decision as regards the petition's admissibility is subject to full
judicial review of the EU judge, any subsequent decision in regard of a positive petition can not be
challenged before the EU courts, regardless of how the Parliament addresses the petition.
The introduction of employment tribunal fees and access to justice is the subject of the
judicial review challenge by the trade union UNISON which goes
before the Supreme Court at the end of March.
Mark represents clients
before the courts in proceedings of all kinds, including commercial litigation,
judicial review, declaratory judgment and injunction proceedings, as well as constitutional
challenges under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Québec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
In the other case, which is an application in appeal
judicial review — Demande de Pourvoi en Controle Judiciaire — being heard
before the Superior Court of Quebec in Montreal, the LANEQ is
challenging the legality of the back - to - work legislation that came into effect on March 1, 2017.
The firm has a diverse public and administrative law practice, which includes acting
before and on behalf of provincial and federal administrative tribunals in
judicial review proceedings, administrative appeals, and constitutional
challenges.
Jonathan frequently represents academies, school, local authorities and individuals in SEN cases
before the FTT, both in appeals against Statements and
judicial review challenges.
Likewise the (non) possibility for individuals to
challenge regulations
before the CJEU, the right of action (and rule of law) principle can not circumvene the Treaties: the issue is that the CJEU stated that
judicial review on CFPS is a matter «within» the sphere of EU Treaties, so that MS (and EU Institutions) can not take action which may impact on them by using «outside» procedures; the rationale is the same used in other cases: if the matter is covered by EU law, absence of a specific rule in EU law does not enable MS (or the Institutions) to act: in the Advice on the Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction, the mere indirect effect of the Convention of the 44/2001 Regulation was considered sufficient to make the matter fall «wholly» within EU competence, thus depriving the MS of the power to act.
In 2012 - 2014, we represented Heiltsuk First Nation
before the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Joint
Review Panel, and in 2015 - 2016, we represented Heiltsuk First Nation and Kitasoo / Xai» xais during a judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal, and successfully challenged the decisions of the National Energy Board and government to allow the building of the pip
Review Panel, and in 2015 - 2016, we represented Heiltsuk First Nation and Kitasoo / Xai» xais during a
judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal, and successfully challenged the decisions of the National Energy Board and government to allow the building of the pip
review before the Federal Court of Appeal, and successfully
challenged the decisions of the National Energy Board and government to allow the building of the pipeline.
In 2015 and 2016, we had the privilege of representing Heiltsuk First Nation and Kitasoo / Xai» xais First Nation during a
judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal, and successfully
challenged the certification of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline: see our blog article here.