The Dobson–Rawlins pact and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: impact of political independence on scientific and legal accountability

This analysis considers whether the independence of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), while safeguarding guidelines from commercial lobbying, may render NICE legally and scientifically unaccountable. The analysis examines the role of judicial reviews and stakeholder consultations in place of peer review in light of current debates concerning the depression guideline

Judicial Review, Irrationality, and the Limits of Intervention by the Courts

When exercising judicial review, the courts, on occasions, have intervened in circumstances where administrative decisions were not irrational. However, these low standards of judicial intervention are arguably constitutional, especially since the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). To this end, this article seeks to establish a zone of executive decision-making, for reasons of democracy, where the courts are clearly excluded. But it is unable to do so. Does this mean, therefore, that judicial intervention on the grounds of irrationality exists without limit? Assuming this to be the case, it is suggested that the courts should show greater respect to the administrative branch of the state where it has genuinely sought to engage with the legal process in arriving at its decisions

The use of empirically based information when reforming and evaluating judicial review

This chapter traces the availability and use of empirically based evidence relating to judicial review in England and Wales. It considers how such evidence has been used by reformers of judicial review and those concerned to evaluate the effectiveness of reforms. Attitudes to empirical and statistical data have changed significantly since the early 20th century and the chapter traces this change in the context of judicial review. It is structured around the following phases: from the 1930s to the early 1960s which was typified by the absence of empirically based evidence and scepticism amongst legal academics regarding the value of such evidence; from the early 1960s to the mid-1980s during which the value of empirical evidence on judicial review emerged; the 1980s to the mid-2000s which saw a significant growth in the available empirical evidence; and finally, the period from the mid-2000s during which empirical and statistical evidence took centre stage when governments used statistically based justifications for limiting access to judicial review

Sourcebook On Environmental Law

xlv;756hal;27c

The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis

This book explores the nature of the Crown in its legal and political context. Here the term The Crown is being used, not as a direct reference to the Queen but, as a reference to the central power of the State which exercises legal and political authority. It is a surprising fact that the nature of the Crown has not been the object of extensive literature with pride of place on constitutional law courses. The nature of the Crown has been taken for granted, in part because it is so fundamental and in part because many academics have no idea what the term The Crown amounts to. This book aims to redress this state of affairs by drawing together in one book a collection of essays that explores what the Crown is, or might be, and the critical issues relating to it. The Crown refers to the authority of Government and the very entity of Government. All the people going about the Governments business, Ministers of the Crown and civil servants do so under the cloak of the Crown with its powers and immunities. The idea of democracy may appear central to our political arrangements but the legal facts are that the Crown subsists not merely as the power: it is the state. If the legal facts of our political arrangements clash with our individual beliefs about democracy then that clash is of the highest importance