Buscar

MEMORY.COM
4.37.48

Invitado

Iniciar sesión Página de inicio

Modo oscuro

Identificador de usuario: 999999
Versión: 4.37.48

www.memory.es

Estás en modo de exploración. debe iniciar sesión para usar MEMORY

Inicia sesión para empezar

Iniciar sesión / registrarse para comenzar »

Confused? » Read about learn, practice and the various modes

» To start learning, click login

1 / 7

[Front]

Judges were appointed by the king, still the case, so the supervisory jurisdiction is the crowns authority, abstract concept that the crown supervising citizens and government

[Back]

What is the historical background of judicial review?

Practique preguntas conocidas

Manténgase al día con sus preguntas pendientes

Completa 5 preguntas para habilitar la práctica

Exámenes

Examen: pon a prueba tus habilidades

Course needs 15 questions

Aprenda nuevas preguntas

Modos dinámicos

InteligenteMezcla inteligente de todos los modos

PersonalizadoUtilice la configuración para ponderar los modos dinámicos

Modo manual [beta]

El propietario del curso no ha habilitado el modo manual

Modos específicos

Aprende con fichas

elección múltipleModo de elección múltiple

Expresión oralResponde con voz

EscrituraModo de solo escritura

Crim - Marcador

1 usuario ha completado este curso

Ningún usuario ha jugado este curso todavía, sé el primero

Crim - Detalles

Niveles:

1) Chapter 1 Visualizar

Preguntas:

7 preguntas

🇬🇧		🇬🇧

Judges were appointed by the king, still the case, so the supervisory jurisdiction is the crowns authority, abstract concept that the crown supervising citizens and government

What is the historical background of judicial review?

The function of to challenge decisions of public and government bodies with public functions, can be challenged on a matter of legality or procedural

What in broad terms is the function of judicial review?

Courts are doing different thing, part of the distinction lies on the fork line of a merits process distinction. So for an appeal, it is a creature of statute, whereas judicial review it’s a creature of the common law an appeal revisits the merits of the case, unlikely to hear evidence but will revist the case law, the arguments etc. Judicial review is looking more at the process, its supposed to be different.

What is the Distinction between appeal and judicial review.

Merits: looking at the case law, arguments etc Process: looks at the process of lawfulness and procedure. Does proportionality stray too much to merits?

2. Distinction between merits and process

This means a claimant requires permission of the court to proceed.

Discretionary nature of the application (the ‘claim’)

- up to the courts whether you meet the requirements - one requirement: it is a public law matter - exhaust your remedies, e.g you might want to go through a statutory appeal first, - strict time limits e.g. 3 months, fairly short, this is different to private law where it can be 3yrs to 6 yrs. This difference is because government actions have wide ranging effect, economic implication etc. Whereas in private court you are allowed to dwell on whether - has to be justiciable -requirement of standing: requirement that there has to be a connection to the matter

What are some examples of requirements for judicial review?

1. A mandatory order 2. A prohibiting order and 3. A quashing orders (previously certiorari).

What are the remedies for judicial review?