This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

GDL Law Notes GDL Constitutional and Administrative Law Notes

The Exclusivity Principle Notes

Updated The Exclusivity Principle Notes

GDL Constitutional and Administrative Law Notes

GDL Constitutional and Administrative Law

Approximately 509 pages

A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of applications from mostly first class students and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor".
...

Available here

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL Constitutional and Administrative Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

The Exclusivity Principle

  • Question of what happens where there are a mix of public and private rights in question.

  • Procedural Exclusivity:

    • O'Reilly v Mackman [1983] - Prisoners had been involved in riots, penalties imposed by the prisons board of visitors. Prisoners complained of unfairness. Brought an action in private law against the board of visitors, CA struck out their action as an abuse of the process of the court – appeal to HoL failed.

      • Lord Diplock dismissed appeals as a matter of principle, they had no private law rights against board of visitors.

      • An action on a public law issue must be brought by way of judicial review or it will be an abuse of process, attempting to evade protections afforded to public bodies:

        • e.g. that cases must pass a leave stage; stringent time limits; discretionary remedies etc.

      • Had they sought the remedy in public law they probably would have won, but outside time limit.

    • Cocks v Thanet District Council [1983] – decided on same afternoon as O’Reilley v Mackman. Homeless plaintiff bringing action against council for breach of duty to house him. Held this duty could only be established by JR.

      • Lord Diplock: where private rights depended upon prior public law decisions, the judicial review process should ordinarily be used.

  • Public Law in Defence:

    • Wandsworth LBC v Winder [1984] – Winder was council tenant in Wandsworth; Council raised the rent on his flat to a level that he claimed was unreasonable, refused to pay the excess.

      • Wandsworth pursued for rent. Argued could not raise unreasonableness as a public law point.

      • Held that Winder could raise unreasonableness as he was raising it as a defence, it was therefore truly collateral to private law proceedings.

      • Otherwise any public authority could destroy any public right through private proceedings.

    • Similar...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL Constitutional and Administrative Law Notes.

More GDL Constitutional And Administrative Law Samples