In more recent discussion of standing by the higher courts, the judiciary has been keen to emphasise the importance to the rule of law of allowing public law decisions to be challenged, even if the connection between the individual and the issue is not a personal or immediate one. Following similar principles set out in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court in Walton v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 44 stressed that it was important that Mr Walton should have standing to challenge a proposed road scheme on environmental grounds, as [reasoning].
Answer
he was the chair of a local organisation that had been formed specifically to oppose the road scheme and had appeared at the relevant inquiry
Tags
#jr #law #public
Question
In more recent discussion of standing by the higher courts, the judiciary has been keen to emphasise the importance to the rule of law of allowing public law decisions to be challenged, even if the connection between the individual and the issue is not a personal or immediate one. Following similar principles set out in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court in Walton v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 44 stressed that it was important that Mr Walton should have standing to challenge a proposed road scheme on environmental grounds, as [reasoning].
Answer
?
Tags
#jr #law #public
Question
In more recent discussion of standing by the higher courts, the judiciary has been keen to emphasise the importance to the rule of law of allowing public law decisions to be challenged, even if the connection between the individual and the issue is not a personal or immediate one. Following similar principles set out in AXA General Insurance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court in Walton v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 44 stressed that it was important that Mr Walton should have standing to challenge a proposed road scheme on environmental grounds, as [reasoning].
Answer
he was the chair of a local organisation that had been formed specifically to oppose the road scheme and had appeared at the relevant inquiry
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it surance Ltd v Lord Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court in Walton v Scottish Ministers [2012] UKSC 44 stressed that it was important that Mr Walton should have standing to challenge a proposed road scheme on environmental grounds, as <span>he was the chair of a local organisation that had been formed specifically to oppose the road scheme and had appeared at the relevant inquiry.<span><body><html>
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.