Jersey Judgment

Warren v. Lieutenant-Governor [2017] 1 JLR 291 (21 June 2017)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Royal Court held that the threshold for judicial review of the Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer a case is very high and was not met in this instance.

Court disposition

Application dismissed

02

Material facts

Parties

Warren

Applicant

Lieutenant-Governor

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Judicial Review / Application for Judicial Review of Lieutenant Governor's Refusal to Refer Case Under Court of Appeal (jersey) Law 1961, Art. 43

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer the case under Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, art. 43 was arguably unlawful, irrational, or procedurally improper

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant contended that the Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer the case was unlawful, irrational, or procedurally improper.
Respondent
The respondent maintained that the decision to refuse referral was within the Lieutenant-Governor's discretion and did not meet the high threshold for judicial intervention.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, art. 43

    A very high threshold applies for judicial review of the Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer a case under Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, art. 43; the decision must be arguably unlawful, irrational, or procedurally improper.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Royal Court held that the threshold for judicial review of the Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer a case is very high and was not met in this instance.

Court disposition

Application dismissed

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2017] 1 JLR 291

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> Warren v. Lieutenant-Governor [2017] 1 JLR 291 (21 June 2017) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2017/JLR171291.html Cite as: [2017] 1 JLR 291 [ New search ] [ Help ] Warren v. Lieutenant-Governor 2017 (1) JLR 291 (21 June 2017) Criminal Procedure-Lieutenant-Governor's reference-refusal to refer-on application for judicial review of Lieutenant-Governor's refusal to refer case under Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, art. 43, Royal Court to determine if decision arguably unlawful, irrational or procedurally improper-very high threshold The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2017 (1) JLR 291 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2017/JLR171291.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Court of Appeal (Jersey) Law 1961, art. 43

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.