Burns & Anor, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NICA 20 (12 April 2022)

Burns & Anor, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NICA 20 (12 April 2022)

The court held that there was no justiciable decision to review because the Command Paper only set out government proposals and no legislation had been introduced. The claims were premature, hypothetical, and non-justiciable, and the subject matter remained within the political arena and ongoing consultation...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] NICA 20
Parties
Applicant: Patricia Burns; Applicant: Daniel McCready; Proposed Respondent: Secretary of State for Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
12 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Justiciability, Parliamentary Sovereignty, Prematurity of Judicial Review, Human Rights Act Compliance, Article 2 of the Northern Ireland Protocol
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Justiciability Parliamentary Sovereignty Prematurity of Judicial Review Human Rights Act Compliance Article 2 of the Northern Ireland Protocol

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patricia Burns

Applicant

Daniel McCready

Applicant

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

Proposed Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can intervene to declare government proposals unconstitutional before legislation is introduced
  2. 2 Whether the Command Paper proposals are justiciable
  3. 3 Whether the application is premature

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no justiciable decision to review because the Command Paper only set out government proposals and no legislation had been introduced. The claims were premature, hypothetical, and non-justiciable, and the subject matter remained within the political arena and ongoing consultation process. Therefore, leave to apply for judicial review was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
  • The appeal is dismissed.