How many times has [2017] EWHC 809 (Admin) been cited?

[2017] EWHC 809 (Admin) is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2017] EWHC 809 (Admin)

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 2

Cited — Ngole, R (on the application of) v The University of Sheffield 2019-07-03
“…Drawing together the findings in R (Pitt) v General Pharmaceutical Council [2017] EWHC 809 (Admin) and R (Core Issues Trust) v Transport for London [2013] EWHC 651, the judge outlined the importance of interpreting standards fairly as a whole and in a practi…”
Cited — Citizens UK, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-07-31
“…uropean Court of Human Rights has described as an actio popularis. I reviewed this area of procedural law in R (Pitt and Tyas) v General Pharmaceutical Council [2017] EWHC 809 (Admin), at paras. 52-67; (2017) 156 BMLR 222 and in R (Adath Yisroel Burial Society) v Senior Coroner for Inner North London [2018] EWHC 969 (Admin), at paras. 6-10 (…”