Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



Tags
#illegality #judicial-review #public
Question
In early judicial review cases in this area, an error of law was only reviewable if it involved a question of jurisdiction, i.e. in relation to a determination of whether a legal power arose in the first place. However, following Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission, [1969] 2 AC 147 such distinctions were removed. Anisminic Ltd. was a company with assets in Egypt, which were nationalised after the Suez conflict of 1956. UK legislation allowed such companies to claim compensation from the Commission, subject to certain conditions. The Commission ruled that Anisminic failed to satisfy these conditions. The House of Lords, however, ruled that this was an error of law because [...]. Such an error meant that the decision had to be quashed.
Answer
the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing

Tags
#illegality #judicial-review #public
Question
In early judicial review cases in this area, an error of law was only reviewable if it involved a question of jurisdiction, i.e. in relation to a determination of whether a legal power arose in the first place. However, following Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission, [1969] 2 AC 147 such distinctions were removed. Anisminic Ltd. was a company with assets in Egypt, which were nationalised after the Suez conflict of 1956. UK legislation allowed such companies to claim compensation from the Commission, subject to certain conditions. The Commission ruled that Anisminic failed to satisfy these conditions. The House of Lords, however, ruled that this was an error of law because [...]. Such an error meant that the decision had to be quashed.
Answer
?

Tags
#illegality #judicial-review #public
Question
In early judicial review cases in this area, an error of law was only reviewable if it involved a question of jurisdiction, i.e. in relation to a determination of whether a legal power arose in the first place. However, following Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission, [1969] 2 AC 147 such distinctions were removed. Anisminic Ltd. was a company with assets in Egypt, which were nationalised after the Suez conflict of 1956. UK legislation allowed such companies to claim compensation from the Commission, subject to certain conditions. The Commission ruled that Anisminic failed to satisfy these conditions. The House of Lords, however, ruled that this was an error of law because [...]. Such an error meant that the decision had to be quashed.
Answer
the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
lowed such companies to claim compensation from the Commission, subject to certain conditions. The Commission ruled that Anisminic failed to satisfy these conditions. The House of Lords, however, ruled that this was an error of law because <span>the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing. Such an error meant that the decision had to be quashed.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised 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.