- Distinguished — Helen Timson, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2023-06-09
“…decision and is in less expansive terms. Lord Sumption accurately set out the law as explained in R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (ex p. Doody) [1994] 1 AC 531 at 560 and the judge failed to apply the law correctly. This involves distinguishing R(Balajigari) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Ci…”
- Explained — Helen Timson, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2023-06-09
“…Lord Sumption cited the well-known passage from Lord Mustill’s judgment in Doody at [1994] 1 AC 531, 560 at his paragraph [30]. He did not suggest that it required any adjustment, and he clearly cited it with approval. He did not attempt to explain what it me…”
- Cited — Helen Timson, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2023-06-09
“…d of Works 14 CBNS 180, 190), it has more recently been expressed in somewhat more measured terms. In R v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex p Doody [1994] 1 AC 531, 560, Lord Mustill said that “fairness” will…”
- Followed — Helen Timson, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2023-06-09
“…ess to be followed before a decision is reached (as was made clear by Lord Mustill in the passage in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 which we have quoted earlier: see para 45), fairness will usually require that to be done where that is feasible for practical and other reasons. In Bank Mella…”
- Cited — Hexpress Healthcare Limited, R (on the application of) v The Care Quality Commission 2023-03-06
“…ral fairness in particular, requires will depend on the circumstances of the particular case. In R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 at 560 Lord Mustill said that “the standards of fairness are not immutable. They may change with the passage of time, both in the general and in their applicat…”
- Cited — Abdullah Khan v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2022-12-15
“…e ‘gist’ of the case against him, and that there is no requirement to give detailed reasons (paragraph 14 of Doody v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1994] 1 AC 531). The UT agreed with the Secretary of State’s counsel that A had been given more than the gist of the case against him in MTR2. The Secretary of State had expl…”
- Cited — Taj, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2021-01-20
“…ppeal concerns the application to the PBS of the fifth and sixth of the well-known principles of administrative fairness set out by the House of Lords in Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 at page [560] (“Doody”) which concern the right of a person affected by a decision to make representations to the decision maker before the decision is taken a…”
- Cited — Junied, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Home Department 2019-12-20
“… was also made to principles of fairness and to the authority of the House of Lords’ decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody [1994] 1 AC 531. The decision to reject, however, was maintained on behalf of the Secretary of State by letter of 28 March 2018. It was among other things said: “While it is u…”
- Followed — Balajigari v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2019-04-16
“…dural fairness were summarised in the following well known passage in the opinion of Lord Mustill in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Doody [1994] 1 AC 531, 560 in which he summarised the effect of earlier authorities:…”
- Cited — Pathan & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-10-02
“…t of UT Judge Allen, where he made reference, for example, to the decision of the House of Lords in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody [1994] 1 AC 531, at 560, in the speech of Lord Mustill, which remains a classic statement of the requirements of procedural fairness in modern administrative law. The argument…”
- Followed — Citizens UK, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-07-31
“…ural fairness were summarised in the following well known passage in the opinion of Lord Mustill in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody [1994] 1 AC 531, at 560, in which he summarised the effect of earlier authorities:…”
- Cited — Neumans LLP v The Solicitors Regulation Authority 2018-03-02
“…has to meet or the reasons for the proposed exercise of the power and an opportunity to respond: see R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 at 560; Al Rawi v Security Service [2011] UKSC 34 at [89]. In Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No. 2) [2013] UKSC 39 Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury said:…”
- Cited — Dharmeshkumar Bhupendrabhai Patel & Anor, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-02-15
“…ich she had exercised her administrative powers in the Applicant’s case in the sense described in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody [1994] 1 AC 531, because she did not contact the college to find out why the Applicant’s CAS had been withdrawn. Had she done so, she would have ascertained that the withdrawa…”
- Cited — Miller & Anor v The Health Service Commissioner for England 2018-02-15
“…What fairness requires in a particular situation depends upon the context. As Lord Mustill held in R v Home Secretary ex p Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 at 560:…”
- Cited — VC, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1) 2018-02-02
“…Procedural fairness: My starting point is the six overarching principles Lord Mustill formulated in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody [1994] 1 AC 531 at 560, which he stated are derived from often-cited authorities. Reflecting the legitimate needs of context and circumstance, and a balance between certainty …”