Allen, R (on the application of) v Coroner for Inner London North

The proceedings were properly characterised as an appeal against a refusal of permission to apply for judicial review, rather than as the judicial-review application itself. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It made no order as to costs, directed assessment of the claimant’s costs under the legal aid regulations, and confined liberty to apply to the form of the order. The supplied text does not reproduce the written reasons.

Allen, R (on the application of) v Coroner for Inner London North was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Administrative Court’s refusal of permission to apply for judicial review. The lower-court judge was Mr Justice Blake. The respondent coroner was not represented at the appeal. The Court of Appeal noted that the circulated judgment inaccurately described the matter as an application for judicial review and corrected it to describe an appeal against refusal of permission. The substantive issues and reasons are contained in a written judgment referred to by the court but not supplied in the text.

Appeal dismissed. Sir Anthony May stated that the disposal was for the reasons given in the court’s written judgment, which had been provided to the parties and made available for publication. That written judgment is not included in the supplied text, so no further substantive reasoning can reliably be extracted.

1. The court corrected the first sentence of the circulated judgment. The proceedings were an appeal against a refusal of permission to apply for judicial review, not an application for judicial review itself.
2. The court accepted the substantive parts of the proposed order: the appeal was dismissed; there was no order for costs; and the claimant’s costs were to be assessed in accordance with the legal aid regulations.
3. The proposed provision allowing a future application for permission to appeal was deleted. The court understood that, because this was an application for permission to apply for judicial review and the refusal had been challenged on appeal, there was no further appeal. Liberty to apply was substituted, limited to the form of the order.

The formal order was: Appeal dismissed.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The appeal against refusal of permission to apply for judicial review was dismissed: [2009] EWCA Civ 738.
2. High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court: Permission to apply for judicial review was refused by Mr Justice Blake. No citation is stated in the judgment.