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 the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing. Such an error meant that [...].
Answer
the decision had to be quashed
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 the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing. Such an error meant that [...].
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 the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing. Such an error meant that [...].
Answer
the decision had to be quashed
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it nisminic failed to satisfy these conditions. The House of Lords, however, ruled that this was an error of law because the Commission had misunderstood the rules of the scheme that it was supposed to be implementing. Such an error meant that <span>the decision had to be quashed.<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.