- Cited — Shahanas Kanhirakandan v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2023-11-06
“…[2003] 2 AC 295, another case decided by the House of Lords, in which Lord Slynn referred to the jurisdiction to quash for “misunderstanding or ignorance of an established and…”
- Explained — Shahanas Kanhirakandan v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2023-11-06
“…g or ignorance of an established and relevant fact” (as explained by Lord Slynn in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board [1992] 2 AC 330 and Alconbury cases [2003] 2 AC 295); (iii) the admission of new evidence on such an appeal is subject to Ladd v Marshall principles, which may be departed from in exceptional circumstances where…”
- Cited — The Counsel General for Wales, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 2022-02-09
“…he challenge was to that decision of principle. In R(Alconbury Development Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] UKHL 23, [2003] 2 AC 295, where a number of planning disputes gave rise to the issue of whether or not the Secretary of State could compliantly with Article 6 ECHR take certain types o…”
- Cited — Maguire, R (on the opplication of) v HM Senior Coroner for Blackpool & Fylde & Ors 2020-06-10
“…[2003] 2 AC 295,…”
- Explained — Kabir v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2019-07-09
“…g or ignorance of an established and relevant fact” (as explained by Lord Slynn in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board [1999] 2 AC 330 and Alconbury cases [2003] 2 AC 295); (iii) the admission of new evidence on such an appeal is subject to Ladd v Marshall principles, which may be departed from in exceptional circumstances where…”
- Cited — AB, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Justice 2019-01-18
“…ny clear and constant jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court: R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2003] 2 AC 295, para. 26. This reflects the fact that the Convention is an international instrument, the correct interpretation of which can be authoritatively expounded only…”
- Cited — Browne v The Parole Board of England & Wales 2018-09-20
“…me enthusiasm, for instance by Lord Slynn in R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] UKHL 23, [2003] 2 AC 295, para 51. In other words, the appellants contend that the four-stage test identified by Lord Sumption and Lord Reed in Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2) [2013] …”
- Cited — Browne v The Parole Board of England & Wales 2018-09-20
“…R (Alconbury Developments Ltd v SoS for the Environment [2003] 2 AC 295…”