Public interest litigants in the Court of Session

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

When Lords Hope and Reed reformed the law of standing in AXA General Insurance v Lord Advocate 1 they grounded that change firmly in constitutional principle. To restrict standing to those for whom a private right or interest is at stake was, in Lord Reed’s view, “incompatible with the courts’ function of preserving the rule of law,” precisely because “[a] public authority can violate the rule of law without infringing the rights of any individual.” 2 Thus, their Lordships agreed that (in public law judicial review cases at least) the time had come to consign the title and interest test to the dustbin.
LanguageEnglish
Pages248-253
Number of pages6
JournalEdinburgh Law Review
Volume19
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2015

Fingerprint

public interest
constitutional state
interest test
public law
public authorities
insurance
Law
time

Keywords

  • court of session
  • individual rights
  • public interest

Cite this

@article{21348289a3334bbab1e25243bccaf272,
title = "Public interest litigants in the Court of Session",
abstract = "When Lords Hope and Reed reformed the law of standing in AXA General Insurance v Lord Advocate 1 they grounded that change firmly in constitutional principle. To restrict standing to those for whom a private right or interest is at stake was, in Lord Reed’s view, “incompatible with the courts’ function of preserving the rule of law,” precisely because “[a] public authority can violate the rule of law without infringing the rights of any individual.” 2 Thus, their Lordships agreed that (in public law judicial review cases at least) the time had come to consign the title and interest test to the dustbin.",
keywords = "court of session, individual rights, public interest",
author = "Christopher McCorkindale",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
doi = "10.3366/elr.2015.0276",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "248--253",
journal = "Edinburgh Law Review",
issn = "1364-9809",
publisher = "Edinburgh University Press",
number = "2",

}

Public interest litigants in the Court of Session. / McCorkindale, Christopher.

In: Edinburgh Law Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, 05.2015, p. 248-253.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public interest litigants in the Court of Session

AU - McCorkindale, Christopher

PY - 2015/5

Y1 - 2015/5

N2 - When Lords Hope and Reed reformed the law of standing in AXA General Insurance v Lord Advocate 1 they grounded that change firmly in constitutional principle. To restrict standing to those for whom a private right or interest is at stake was, in Lord Reed’s view, “incompatible with the courts’ function of preserving the rule of law,” precisely because “[a] public authority can violate the rule of law without infringing the rights of any individual.” 2 Thus, their Lordships agreed that (in public law judicial review cases at least) the time had come to consign the title and interest test to the dustbin.

AB - When Lords Hope and Reed reformed the law of standing in AXA General Insurance v Lord Advocate 1 they grounded that change firmly in constitutional principle. To restrict standing to those for whom a private right or interest is at stake was, in Lord Reed’s view, “incompatible with the courts’ function of preserving the rule of law,” precisely because “[a] public authority can violate the rule of law without infringing the rights of any individual.” 2 Thus, their Lordships agreed that (in public law judicial review cases at least) the time had come to consign the title and interest test to the dustbin.

KW - court of session

KW - individual rights

KW - public interest

U2 - 10.3366/elr.2015.0276

DO - 10.3366/elr.2015.0276

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 248

EP - 253

JO - Edinburgh Law Review

T2 - Edinburgh Law Review

JF - Edinburgh Law Review

SN - 1364-9809

IS - 2

ER -