||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 266 (Nov)
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Auld, Maurice Kay and Lloyd LJJ
||The claimant appeared in person.
||Rabinder Singh QC and Yvette Genn (instructed by the Ethical Standards Board for England) for the defendant.
||21 November 2005
Tribunal - Reasons - Failure by tribunal to give reasons for conclusion essential to judgment - Whether appropriate to remit matter to tribunal for reconsideration and reformulation of reasons.
Under CPR52, an appellate court had widely expressed and clear powers to remit to the court below any issue as well as any claim: any issue might involve adequacy of reasons as to the decision under challenge. The normal course would be for an inadequately reasoned decision to be remitted for explanation or reconsideration and reformulation in the light of an appellate court's judgment. Moreover, in circumstances where a regulatory framework had been put in place designed to control the behaviour of councillors, a judge's failure to remit a decision for further reasons usurped the functions of a specialist regulatory body.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary