M, Re Judicial Review [2004] NIQB 94 (16 June 2004)

M, Re Judicial Review [2004] NIQB 94 (16 June 2004)

The Trust's general policy of refusing attendance of a next friend or solicitor at a case conference unless the parent attends is lawful and justified, but a rigid blanket ban constitutes unlawful fettering of discretion; however, in this case, the applicant failed to provide medical evidence or justification for absence, and the Trust's refusal was reasonable and would have been the same even if discretion had been properly exercised.

Citation
[2004] NIQB 94
Parties
Applicant: M; Respondent: Down Lisburn Trust
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
16 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Child Protection, Disability Discrimination, Procedural Fairness, Fettering of Discretion
Administrative Law Family Law Human Rights Judicial Review Child Protection Disability Discrimination Procedural Fairness 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Applicant

Down Lisburn Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Trust unlawfully refused to permit the applicant's solicitor to attend a case conference as next friend in the applicant's absence
  2. 2 Whether the Trust's policy unlawfully fettered its discretion by rigidly excluding exceptions
  3. 3 Whether the Trust's decision breached Articles 6, 8, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Trust's general policy of refusing attendance of a next friend or solicitor at a case conference unless the parent attends is lawful and justified, but a rigid blanket ban constitutes unlawful fettering of discretion; however, in this case, the applicant failed to provide medical evidence or justification for absence, and the Trust's refusal was reasonable and would have been the same even if discretion had been properly exercised.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed