Mclnnes v Onslow-Fane [1978] 3 All ER 211 (VC)

• Plaintiff’s request to the British Boxing Board for a manager’s licence had been turned down, and had not been given reasons nor an oral hearing. Previous to this, the board revoked his licences to be a promoter, MC and trainer.

• He argued that BBB was in breach of natural justice (only in respect of the refusal for a manager’s licence).

• Megarry VC held that the BBB was under a duty, as a monopoly controller of the industry, to consider applications honestly, without bias or capriciousness, the duty of procedural fairness only arose where a current right was being sacrificed, and NOT where the right was merely being refused in the first place. 

Megarry VC

• The Neale decision shows that the court is entitled to intervene in such cases.

• There are 3 categories:

  1. Where the body revokes a right that has previously been held (forfeiture cases) there is a right to know the grounds, to a fair hearing, and decision by an unbiased panel.

  2. The second category are cases of mere ‘application’ for a right. Here those procedural requirements don’t apply.

  3. The intermediary third category is where Plaintiff is applying for a right but has a legitimate expectation that it will be granted. This is closer to the forfeiture cases.

     • (Though Megarry VC doesn’t go into this, as he says there is no LE here: Arguably wrong, since Plaintiff had previously held all those other forms of licence and therefore would have expected to be granted the final type of licence. Instead Megarry just concludes that this is a mere ‘application’ case).