Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles

CHILD SUPPORT/JUDICIAL REVIEW: R (Mantle) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Sep 29, 2018, 16:12 PM
Slug : r-mantle-v-secretary-of-state-for-work-and-pensions
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 30, 2008, 05:41 AM
Article ID : 84863

(Queen's Bench Division; King J; 30 June 2008)

The appeal tribunal allowed the mother's appeal against an assessment of the maintenance to be paid by the father, and recalculated the maintenance figure. The father's subsequent appeal was rejected. The father's appeal to the Commissioner's Office was significantly out of time, and the Commissioner refused to consider it. The father sought leave to judicially review the Commissioner's decision.

Refusing permission for judicial review, the court noted that there was a residual jurisdiction to allow judicial review of the Commissioner's decision, by analogy with the jurisdiction to allow judicial review of a decision of a county court refusing permission to appeal, but such jurisdiction was narrowly confined to 'errors of law going to jurisdiction', or cases in which there had been a clear breach of natural justice. This case was outside that narrow jurisdiction.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from