Procedure and substance of remedies involving a judicial order awarded against public bodies in England

In England, Courts review the legality of administrative actions through specialized process known as the judicial review proceedings. Through the reforms experienced in the recent past, England came to resemble the Continental European legal systems in the sense it now has a specialized branch for the settlement of administrative disputes. Judicial review is a specialized procedure differing from ordinary proceedings and administration is subject to a different body of substantive rules that can be classified as administrative law. Judicial review is a remedy of last resort. Before applying for judicial review, claimants must exhaust other alternative remedies. In this sense administrative complaints and application to tribunals are deemed effective alternative remedies. Tribunals have great importance as they resolve the majority of the disputes arising between the state and the citizens. Through the reforms made in the recent past tribunals are restructured and became court-like institutions. Judicial Review is preconditioned to the permission of the court. In the permission stage, the court considers justiciability of the matter in judicial review proceedings, standing, delay and whether effective alternative remedies are exhausted. In this sense, permission stage is similar to the first examination upon receival of petition in Turkish administrative law. However, contrary to the Turkish law, in the permission stage merits of the claim is also evaluated along with procedural requirements. Meritless claims are not allowed to be argued before the court in the substantive stage. In the substantive stage, the court judges the legality of administrative acts and omissions. While in principle a claimant having successfully argued their case should vi be entitled to the order they are seeking. However, in judicial review proceedings, the court has discretion on the matter. The court can agree with the claimant but still refuse to award the order requested by the claimant. In the exercise of its discretion upon the matter, the court considers the conduct of the claimant, delay, effect of the decision on the administration and third parties. Having ascertained that the order requested is just and convenient for the settlement of the dispute, the court can award a quashing order, a prohibiting order, a mandatory order, an injunction or a declaration. Not all the aforementioned orders compel the administration to act in certain way. Contrary to the quashing orders and declarations; prohibiting orders, mandatory orders and injunctions force the administration to either act or refrain from acting in the specified manner. As the name suggests a prohibiting order prohibits the administration from taking an action that will be unlawful. A mandatory order compels the administration to fulfill its duties and exercise discretion in a lawful way. Injunction is a private law remedy and has entered the sphere of public law in a relevantly later stage. It can take either mandatory or prohibitory form and serves the same purpose as the mandatory and prohibiting orders. However, an injunction can be awarded as an interim remedy while prohibiting and mandatory orders are only available as a final remedy.