Bewry, R (on the application of) v Legal Services Commission [2001] EWCA Civ 731 (11 May 2001)

Bewry, R (on the application of) v Legal Services Commission [2001] EWCA Civ 731 (11 May 2001)

The Legal Services Commission lawfully applied the Lord Chancellor's guidance in refusing exceptional funding; the guidance is compatible with Article 6 ECHR; and there was no arguable case that the refusal was unlawful or irrational. The Administrative Court judge's refusal to grant permission for judicial review was correct.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 731
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Raymond Bewry; Respondent/defendant: Legal Services Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (application for Permission to Appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Application for Permission to Appeal Refusal of Judicial Review
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Exceptional Funding, Access to Justice Act 1999, Article 6 ECHR, Employment Tribunal Representation, Judicial Review Procedure
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Legal Aid Exceptional Funding Access to Justice Act 1999 Article 6 ECHR Employment Tribunal Representation Judicial Review Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Bewry

Applicant/appellant

Legal Services Commission

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (application for Permission to Appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Application for Permission to Appeal Refusal of Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Legal Services Commission's refusal to grant exceptional funding under section 6(8)(b) of the Access to Justice Act 1999 was unlawful
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Chancellor's guidance on exceptional funding is compatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether the Administrative Court judge erred in refusing permission for judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The Legal Services Commission lawfully applied the Lord Chancellor's guidance in refusing exceptional funding; the guidance is compatible with Article 6 ECHR; and there was no arguable case that the refusal was unlawful or irrational. The Administrative Court judge's refusal to grant permission for judicial review was correct.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • No order for costs