Hopley, R (on the application of) v Liverpool Health Authority & Ors [2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin) (30 July 2002)

Hopley, R (on the application of) v Liverpool Health Authority & Ors [2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin) (30 July 2002)

The refusal by Liverpool Health Authority to consent to a With Profits Structured Settlement under s.2 Damages Act 1996 was not amenable to judicial review because the function performed was private in nature, arising from the settlement of private litigation, and did not involve the performance of a public law duty to the claimant. No public law right or legitimate expectation was infringed. Even if reviewable, the decision was not unlawful as the NHSLA's discretion was expressly circumscribed by statute and policy considerations were legitimate.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Richard Hopley (by his mother and Litigation Friend, Patricia Hopley); First Defendant: Liverpool Health Authority; Second Defendant: National Health Service Litigation Authority; Third Defendant: Department of Health
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Permission Granted
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review—amenability, Structured Settlements, Damages Act 1996, Public Vs Private Law Functions, Fettering of Discretion
Administrative Law Personal Injury Clinical Negligence Judicial Review—amenability Structured Settlements Damages Act 1996 Public Vs Private Law Functions Fettering of Discretion

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Hopley (by his mother and Litigation Friend, Patricia Hopley)

Claimant

Liverpool Health Authority

First Defendant

National Health Service Litigation Authority

Second Defendant

Department of Health

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Permission Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal by a public health authority to consent to a With Profits Structured Settlement under s.2 Damages Act 1996 is amenable to judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the refusal was unlawful due to irrelevant considerations, fettering of discretion, or unreasonableness

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal by Liverpool Health Authority to consent to a With Profits Structured Settlement under s.2 Damages Act 1996 was not amenable to judicial review because the function performed was private in nature, arising from the settlement of private litigation, and did not involve the performance of a public law duty to the claimant. No public law right or legitimate expectation was infringed. Even if reviewable, the decision was not unlawful as the NHSLA's discretion was expressly circumscribed by statute and policy considerations were legitimate.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review refused
  • No order requiring defendants to fund a With Profits Structured Settlement