ACTIONS AGAINST POLICE

How to Challenge a Public Authority Decision

By their nature, public authorities are required to act in the interests of their communities. However, at times, their decision-making may be flawed or unjust as a result of blind spots or unconscious bias.

Issues like immigration, planning, housing disputes and other matters that may be affected by personal opinion, preference or prejudice can lead to disputes over their handling by legislators, administrators and law enforcement.

So, what are your legal rights against public bodies? What is the most effective way to make complaints against local councils?

In this article, the solicitors at DPP Law will explain the key principles of public law and run through the legal avenues available to you if you wish to challenge a public authority decision – including judicial review, complaints procedures and alternative dispute resolution.

What is a public authority and when can its decisions be challenged?

Section 6(3) of the Human Rights Act explains that a public authority can be:

(a) a court or tribunal

(b) any person certain of whose functions are functions of a public nature

The following bodies fall under this definition:

• Government departments and ministers
• Local councils
• Industry regulators
• Police forces
• Health authorities

Public authorities do not include Parliament, MPs or members of the House of Lords, nor do they include private companies not in receipt of public funding nor commissioned by a public authority to deliver their work.

It is worth noting that the act does not define “functions of a public nature” any further, so as to allow for social changes and development.

You are within your rights to challenge a public authority decision if you have reason to believe that authority has violated your rights (as defined under the Human Rights Act), or if they have acted in contravention of UK law.

What are the legal grounds for challenging a public authority decision?

You may have legal recourse to instigate a public law challenge on any of the following grounds:

• Illegality
• Procedural unfairness
• Irrationality

Illegality

If you feel you can prove that a public authority did not have the legal right or power to make the decision you are challenging, you may be able to get that decision nullified.

Procedural unfairness

If you have reason to believe that the process leading to the public authority decision was not undertaken fairly, this may also be sufficient to challenge it. This unfairness may have been due to bias or as a result of negligence.

Irrationality

It is extremely difficult to argue irrationality when challenging a public authority decision. It requires the challenging party to prove that no rational person, acting within reason, would ever have made or approved the decision in question.

If you feel that any of the above grounds applies to your case, you may be able to appeal the public authority decision or bring it to judicial review.

What is judicial review and when should you use it?

Judicial review in the UK sees judges explore decisions made by local authorities, analysing their lawfulness and deciding whether they may go ahead.

The moral implications or outcomes of those decisions do not come into the equation: reviews are conducted purely on the basis of UK legislation, to conclude whether or not the public authority was acting in contravention of the law – through direct illegality, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Judicial review should only be sought when all other avenues have been exhausted. If there is available recourse to appeal a decision or to seek alternate dispute resolution, you will need to follow those processes to their end points first before applying to judicial review as a final resort.

For example, if you have a complaint regarding a decision made by your local police force, you should follow the force’s complaints procedure first, along with exploring other avenues for action against the police before considering judicial review.

Timescales

If you wish to bring a judicial review regarding a public authority decision, you will need to act fairly quickly. If the issue relates to planning permission, you will have just six weeks to apply from the date the decision was made.

For any other issue, you will usually have up to three months. Beyond that point, your case will not be considered and the decision will stand.

It is common for the process to take a year from instructing your solicitor to the conclusion of the judicial review and the resulting decision.

What are the steps to challenge a public authority decision?

Step 1: Appeals and dispute resolution

As mentioned above, the initial step when challenging a public decision should always be to seek out opportunities to appeal that decision, or to employ other approved methods of dispute resolution. Once these options are exhausted, you may choose to go to judicial review.

Step 2: Legal support and PAP letter

In order to achieve the best outcome, we highly recommend instructing a solicitor or legal advisor who is experienced when it comes to processes of this kind. They will assist you in writing a PAP (pre-action protocol) letter, explaining your claim to the public authority body you wish to challenge.

This letter should lay out your claim and your desired outcome. It may be that the public authority is able to point you in the direction of an alternative dispute resolution option. Alternatively, they may agree to review their decision. However, if you are unsatisfied with their response, the next step is to seek permission from the court to proceed to judicial review.

Step 3: Permission

Your legal advisor will help you with your application for permission, which the court will review to determine whether or not the case is arguable. It is possible that permission will be refused at this stage, but this does not mean the end of your application.

Instead, you may request to renew it, which means it will be heard in open court. This often gives applications a far better chance of being approved.

Step 4: Pleadings and hearing

Once you have permission to bring your case to judicial review, you and the public authority whose decision you are contesting will be required to exchange official documents setting out your case. These are also known as “pleadings”, and you will be supported by your legal advisor when developing your own. You and the defendant party may also be required to provide evidence at this stage.

At the end of this process, your case will be heard in the High Court. This will usually last for a day, though more complex hearings may take longer.

What are the possible outcomes of a judicial review or complaint?

Should the judicial review find in your favour, the judge may order that the public authority’s decision be nullified or “quashed”. It is important to note, however, that this simply requires the authority to go “back to the drawing board”. They will still need to follow their set processes regarding the issue at hand, and you may find that they return with the same decision at the end of that process; they will simply have used a farer and more legally sound route this time around.

Alternatively, it may be that a judge moves to uphold the original decision made by the public authority. If this occurs, you will usually retain the right to apply to the court of appeal and have the decision re-evaluated. However, you will be required to seek permission and incur further costs in order to do so.

Further advice

As you may have gathered from the information above, public law challenges can be complex. The best first step is always to discuss your options with a highly qualified team of solicitors, such as the specialists at DPP Law.

Whatever the decision you wish to contest, and whatever your current position, please don’t hesitate to contact DPP Law today for further help and advice.

We will take you through your options in a transparent and proactive manner, and will be there to provide support and guidance throughout any challenge, process or hearing.