Jones, R (on the application of) v Judicial Appointments Commission

Jones, R (on the application of) v Judicial Appointments Commission

The Judicial Appointments Commission is entitled to adopt and apply a policy that normally prevents selection for judicial appointment where penalty points on a driving licence exceed six; the policy is rational, lawful, and was properly applied, and the decision to reject the claimant was not irrational.

Parties
Claimant: Graham Stuart Jones; Defendant: Judicial Appointments Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Good Character Requirement, Judicial Selection, Rationality of Administrative Decisions
Administrative Law Judicial Appointments Good Character Requirement Judicial Selection Rationality of Administrative Decisions

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

Parties

Graham Stuart Jones

Claimant

Judicial Appointments Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the JAC's good character policy is rational and lawful under section 63(3) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
  2. 2 Whether the policy was properly applied to the claimant's case
  3. 3 Whether the decision to reject the claimant was irrational

Ratio Decidendi

The Judicial Appointments Commission is entitled to adopt and apply a policy that normally prevents selection for judicial appointment where penalty points on a driving licence exceed six; the policy is rational, lawful, and was properly applied, and the decision to reject the claimant was not irrational.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed