R (Save Our Railways) v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising

Last updated

R (Save Our Railways) v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising
CrossCountry 170113 in Snow.JPG
Court Court of Appeal
Citation(s)[1996] CLC 596, (18 Dec 1995) The Times
Keywords
Rail

R (Save Our Railways) v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising [1996] CLC 596 is a UK enterprise law case, concerning rail transport in Great Britain.

Contents

Facts

The claimant, Save Our Railways, sought judicial review for the Director of Passenger Rail Franchising failing to take account of Minister guidance under the Railways Act 1993. Save Our Railways was an organisation sponsored by trade unions that opposed privatisation. The Minister’s instruction, laid before Parliament said ‘for the initial letting of franchises, your specification of minimum service levels... is to be based on that being provided by British Rail immediately prior to franchising.’ However, with the Minister’s approval, in the first 7 franchises, offered by the Rail Franchising Director service levels were set below existing services. It reasoned that services would either be sustained by demand or unwarranted subsidies for loss making services would be avoided.

Judgment

The High Court dismissed the application for judicial review.

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal, Tom Bingham (giving judgment with Waite LJ and Otton LJ) held that Save Our Railways had standing for judicial review on behalf of rail users. The Franchise Director had not properly understood Ministerial instructions. But no mandatory remedy was granted, referring the question back to the Franchise Director for further consideration. The Court said the DPRF comply with instructions that Passenger Service Requirement be based on that provided by British Rail. This justified quashing the PSR which fell below the standard.

Sir Thomas Bingham MR said the following:

‘Based on’ is not a term of art, and it is not an exact term. It permits some latitude. It is obvious that every train timetabled by BR need not continue to run. There may be changes, and within limits it is for the Franchising Director to rule on the extent of the changes. His is the primary judgment. But there is a limit to the changes which may be made without ceasing to comply with the instruction.... The changes must in our view be marginal, not significant or substantial... The Franchising Director’s approach... is an intelligible and no way irrational approach. But it is not in our view an approach which gives effect to the instruction.

Significance

Afterwards, the Minister simply decided ‘to clarify’ that the rules were ‘to ensure that they reflect beyond doubt the policy that we have always followed’. So in effect Save Our Railways won the case, but lost the campaign.

See also

Related Research Articles

Southern (Govia Thameslink Railway) British train operating company

Southern is the brand name used by the Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) train operating company on the Southern routes of the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise in England. It is a subsidiary of Govia, a joint venture between transport groups Go-Ahead and Keolis, and has operated the South Central rail franchise since August 2001 and the Gatwick Express service since June 2008. When the franchise was subsumed into GTR, Southern was split from Gatwick Express and the two became separate brands, alongside the Thameslink and Great Northern brands.

Beeching cuts 1963-65 plan to rationalise the British railway system

The Beeching cuts was a plan to increase the efficiency of the nationalised railway system in Great Britain. The plan was outlined in two reports: The Reshaping of British Railways (1963) and The Development of the Major Railway Trunk Routes (1965), written by Richard Beeching and published by the British Railways Board.

Richard Beeching British physicist and engineer (1913-1985)

Richard Beeching, Baron Beeching, commonly known as Dr Beeching, was a physicist and engineer who for a short but very notable time was chairman of British Railways. He became a household name in Britain in the early 1960s for his report The Reshaping of British Railways, commonly referred to as "The Beeching Report", which led to far-reaching changes in the railway network, popularly known as "the Beeching Axe".

Department for Transport United Kingdom government ministerial department responsible for the English transport network

The Department for Transport (DfT) is the United Kingdom government department responsible for the English transport network and a limited number of transport matters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that have not been devolved. The department is run by the Secretary of State for Transport, currently Grant Shapps.

There are effectively two separate mainline railway systems in the United Kingdom – the Great Britain system and the Northern Ireland system, which are regulated and operated separately, and are constituted under separate pieces of United Kingdom legislation.

The privatisation of British Rail was the process by which ownership and operation of the railways of Great Britain passed from government control into private hands. Begun in 1994, it had been completed by 1997. The deregulation of the industry was initiated by EU Directive 91/440 in 1991, which aimed to create a more efficient rail network by creating greater competition.

Strategic Rail Authority

The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) was a non-departmental public body in the United Kingdom set up under the Transport Act 2000 to provide strategic direction for the railway industry. Its motto was 'Britain's railway, properly delivered'. It was abolished by the Railways Order 2006, its functions being absorbed by the Department for Transport or the Office of Rail Regulation.

<i>R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport</i> UK-Spanish legal case

R v Secretary of State for Transport was a judicial review case taken against the United Kingdom government by a company of Spanish fishermen who claimed that the United Kingdom had breached European Union law by requiring ships to have a majority of British owners if they were to be registered in the UK. The case produced a number of significant judgements on British constitutional law, and was the first time that courts held that they had power to restrain the application of an Act of Parliament pending trial and ultimately to disapply that Act when it was found to be contrary to EU law.

<i>Caledonian Sleeper</i> Overnight sleeper trains between London and Scotland

Caledonian Sleeper is the collective name for overnight sleeper train services between London and Scotland, in the United Kingdom. It is one of only two currently operating sleeper services on the railway in the United Kingdom, the other being the Night Riviera which runs between London and Penzance.

Passenger rail franchising in Great Britain Outsourcing of rail transport

Passenger rail franchising in Great Britain is the system of contracting the operation of the passenger services on the railways of Great Britain to private companies, which has been in effect since 1996 and was greatly altered in 2020, with rail franchising being effectively abolished in May 2021.

United Kingdom administrative law

United Kingdom administrative law is part of UK constitutional law that is designed through judicial review to hold executive power and public bodies accountable under the law. A person can apply to the High Court to challenge a public body's decision if they have a "sufficient interest", within three months of the grounds of the cause of action becoming known. By contrast, claims against public bodies in tort or contract are usually limited by the Limitation Act 1980 to a period of 6 years. Almost any public body, or private bodies exercising public functions, can be the target of judicial review, including a government department, a local council, any Minister, the Prime Minister, or any other body that is created by law. The only public body whose decisions cannot be reviewed is Parliament, when it passes an Act. Otherwise, a claimant can argue that a public body's decision was unlawful in five main types of case: (1) it exceeded the lawful power of the body, used its power for an improper purpose, or acted unreasonably, (2) it violated a legitimate expectation, (3) failed to exercise relevant and independent judgement, (4) exhibited bias or a conflict of interest, or failed to give a fair hearing, and (5) violated a human right. As a remedy, a claimant can ask for the public body's decisions to be declared void and quashed, or it could ask for an order to make the body do something, or prevent the body from acting unlawfully. A court may also declare the parties' rights and duties, give an injunction, or compensation could also be payable in tort or contract.

<i>Foster Bryant Surveying Ltd v Bryant</i> 2007 company law case in the United Kingdom

Foster Bryant Surveying Ltd v Bryant[2007] EWCA Civ 200 is a 2007 UK company law case, concerning the fiduciary duty of directors to avoid conflicts of interest. It follows some considerable unrest in the courts about the strictness of the law relating to taking corporate opportunities.

United Kingdom enterprise law

United Kingdom enterprise law concerns the ownership and regulation of organisations producing goods and services in the UK, European and international economy. Private enterprises are usually incorporated under the Companies Act 2006, regulated by company law, competition law, and insolvency law, while almost one third of the workforce and half of the UK economy is in enterprises subject to special regulation. Enterprise law mediates the rights and duties of investors, workers, consumers and the public to ensure efficient production, and deliver services that UK and international law sees as universal human rights. Labour, company, competition and insolvency law create general rights for stakeholders, and set a basic framework for enterprise governance, but rules of governance, competition and insolvency are altered in specific enterprises to uphold the public interest, as well as civil and social rights. Universities and schools have traditionally been publicly established, and socially regulated, to ensure universal education. The National Health Service was set up in 1946 to provide everyone with free health care, regardless of class or income, paid for by progressive taxation. The UK government controls monetary policy and regulates private banking through the publicly owned Bank of England, to complement its fiscal policy. Taxation and spending composes nearly half of total economic activity, but this has diminished since 1979.

<i>R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Bancoult (No 2)</i> UK constitutional law case on the Chagos Islanders

R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Bancoult [2008] UKHL 61 is a UK constitutional law case in the House of Lords concerning the removal of the Chagos Islanders and the exercise of the Royal Prerogative. The Chagos Islands, acquired by the United Kingdom in 1814, were reorganised as the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) in 1965 for the purpose of removing its inhabitants. Under a 1971 Order in Council, the Chagossians were forcibly removed, and the central island of Diego Garcia leased to the United States for use as a military outpost.

Illegality in Singapore administrative law Singaporean judicial review doctrine

Illegality is one of the three broad headings of judicial review of administrative action in Singapore, the others being irrationality and procedural impropriety. To avoid acting illegally, an administrative body or public authority must correctly understand the law regulating its power to act and to make decisions, and give effect to it.

Exclusion of judicial review in Singapore law Singapores application of legal concept to protect the exercise of executive power

Exclusion of judicial review has been attempted by the Parliament of Singapore to protect the exercise of executive power. Typically, this has been done though the insertion of finality or total ouster clauses into Acts of Parliament, or by wording powers conferred by Acts on decision-makers subjectively. Finality clauses are generally viewed restrictively by courts in the United Kingdom. The courts there have taken the view that such clauses are, subject to some exceptions, not effective in denying or restricting the extent to which the courts are able to exercise judicial review. In contrast, Singapore cases suggest that ouster clauses cannot prevent the High Court from exercising supervisory jurisdiction over the exercise of executive power where authorities have committed jurisdictional errors of law, but are effective against non-jurisdictional errors of law.

Arriva Rail North British railway operating company

Arriva Rail North, branded as Northern by Arriva was a train operating company in Northern England which began operating the Northern franchise on 1 April 2016 and inherited units from the previous operator Northern Rail. A subsidiary of Arriva UK Trains, Northern was the largest train franchise in the United Kingdom in terms of the size of the network and the number of weekly services run. Its trains called at 528 stations, about a quarter of all stations in the country; of these stations 476 were operated by Northern. On 1 March 2020, Arriva Rail North Limited ceased to operate and all operations were handed to HM Government's Operator of Last Resort.

Impact of the privatisation of British Rail

The impact of the privatisation of British Rail has been the subject of much debate, with the stated benefits including improved customer service, and more investment; and stated drawbacks including higher fares, lower punctuality and increased rail subsidies. The privatisation of British Rail began in the 1990s.

<i>R (Corner House Research) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office</i>

R v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2008] UKHL 60 is a UK constitutional law case, concerning the rule of law.

<i>Clark v University of Lincolnshire and Humberside</i> Legal Case

Clark v University of Lincolnshire and Humberside [2000] EWCA Civ 129 is a UK judicial review and enterprise law case, concerning the regulation of education.

References