Judicial review—the Tameside duty

Produced in partnership with Gabriel Tan of Wilson Solicitors LLP

Practice notes

Judicial review—the Tameside duty

Produced in partnership with Gabriel Tan of Wilson Solicitors LLP

Practice notes

Overview of the Tameside duty

The Tameside duty takes its name from Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside MBC. As Lord Diplock explained, the duty requires the decision-maker to have ‘[asked] himself the right question and take reasonable steps to acquaint himself with the relevant information to enable him to answer it correctly’. It is most commonly described as a duty to make sufficient or due inquiry. For background reading, see: ‘Due Inquiry’: Supperstone, Goudie and Walker on Judicial Review [10.59].

This duty represents a logical extension of the more general and longstanding public law principle that a decision-maker should take into account all relevant considerations and no irrelevant ones, most notably emanating from Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation. In this regard, Lord Diplock’s formulation of the test in the Tameside case is ‘firmly rooted in the Wednesbury principle’ (R (Law Society) v Lord Chancellor). This is distinct from the (erroneous) notion that the duty emanates from a duty of procedural fairness to the applicant

Gabriel Tan

Public Law Caseworker, Wilson Solicitors LLP

Gabriel is a Public Law caseworker at Wilson Solicitors, specialising in judicial reviews and civil claims against public authorities. He has experience in public law matters across a wide-range of issues, including policy challenges, and the consultation duties of public authorities, amongst others.

��

Gabriel has had conduct of litigation before the County Court, Upper Tribunal, the Administrative Court, and the Court of Appeal. He has been instructed by individuals, as well as NGOs, both in litigation and general research matters.

��

Gabriel writes regularly and has been published across a wide range of publications on various aspects of public law, including academic journals (e.g. Public Law, Edinburgh Law Review), academic blogs (e.g. UK Constitutional Law Association Blog), and practitioners’ publications (e.g. Free Movement).

��

Gabriel also has experience in public law academic research, having been a Research Associate at Durham Law School working on an empirical project on the duty of candour in judicial review.

��

Gabriel is an active commentator on public law on Twitter (@finishedloading) and writes his own blog, the Administrative Court Blog (@admcourtblog), where he provides regular case notes and commentary on Administrative Court decisions.

Jurisdiction(s):

United Kingdom

��Ӱ��