Cleeland v Criminal Cases Review Commission

Cleeland v Criminal Cases Review Commission

The Commission exercised its discretion appropriately in not according priority to the claimant's case; there was no arguable basis that the decision was unlawful or perverse.

Parties
Claimant: Paul Alexander Cleeland; Defendant: Criminal Cases Review Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Priority of Case Allocation, Discretion of Public Bodies, Access to Courts
Criminal Law Judicial Review Priority of Case Allocation Discretion of Public Bodies Access to Courts

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Alexander Cleeland

Claimant

Criminal Cases Review Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Criminal Cases Review Commission's refusal to give priority to the claimant's application was unlawful or perverse
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was denied access to the courts

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission exercised its discretion appropriately in not according priority to the claimant's case; there was no arguable basis that the decision was unlawful or perverse.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed