Assura Pharmacy Ltd, R (on the application of) v E Moss Ltd (t/a Alliance Pharmacy) [2008] EWCA Civ 1356 (05 December 2008)

Assura Pharmacy Ltd, R (on the application of) v E Moss Ltd (t/a Alliance Pharmacy) [2008] EWCA Civ 1356 (05 December 2008)

PAC decisions in both cases were legally tenable; Regulation 12 requires consideration of adequacy and reasonable choice, but does not mandate separate providers or competition. PAC gave sufficient reasons and properly applied statutory criteria. Judicial review does not permit courts to rewrite or distort statutory regulation prioritising adequacy over competition.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 1356
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Assura Pharmacy Limited; Respondent/defendant/cross Appellant: National Health Service Litigation Authority (Family Health Services Appeal Unit); Interested Party: E Moss Limited (trading as Alliance Pharmacy)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Assura's appeal dismissed; NHSLA's appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Pharmaceutical Services Regulation, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Competition and Choice in NHS Pharmacy Provision
Administrative Law Health Law Pharmaceutical Services Regulation Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation Competition and Choice in NHS Pharmacy Provision

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Assura Pharmacy Limited

Appellant/claimant

National Health Service Litigation Authority (Family Health Services Appeal Unit)

Respondent/defendant/cross Appellant

E Moss Limited (trading as Alliance Pharmacy)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of 'reasonable choice' under NHS Pharmaceutical Services Regulations 2005
  2. 2 Adequacy of pharmaceutical services in neighbourhoods under Regulation 12
  3. 3 Obligation to follow Department of Health guidance

Ratio Decidendi

PAC decisions in both cases were legally tenable; Regulation 12 requires consideration of adequacy and reasonable choice, but does not mandate separate providers or competition. PAC gave sufficient reasons and properly applied statutory criteria. Judicial review does not permit courts to rewrite or distort statutory regulation prioritising adequacy over competition.

Court Disposition

Assura's appeal dismissed; NHSLA's appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Todmorden: PAC decision upheld; refusal to quash.
  • Freckleton: PAC decision reinstated; judge's quashing order reversed.