We are presented with a question finding its roots in the Judicial Review area of Administrative law. The essay will also investigate the changing role of the Wednesbury test in judicial review and its apparent superseding by the mo

The first 200 words of this essay...

We are presented with a question finding its roots in the 'Judicial Review' area of Administrative law. Particularly, a quote (Varuhas, 2009) is presented which probes into the level of scrutiny a court can place into a Minister's decisions and touches upon how far a court can look into the substance of a decision, surpassing the usual 'unreasonableness' approach. The doctrine governing this area that of 'separation of powers' which forces the court to take a stand-off approach to executive decision making. The essay will also investigate the changing role of the Wednesbury test in judicial review and it's apparent superseding by the more European-friendly 'proportionality test'. This is a widely discussed topic with a vast range of commentary and jurisprudence attempting to shed light on the muddle that this area of judicial review is in. With no decisive guidance in law of which test is prevalent, there continues to be a battle between the schools of thought supporting each approach, causing a lack of transparency and predictableness in the outcome of cases.

What is Judicial Review?

Judicial review is a key form of holding the Executive accountable for decisions they make. It is brought to a court,