I believe that they would refer the decision back to the Minister to take into account relevant considerations, which would prevent a perversity. For example, if a Minister were to say that joining the euro was not significant, and if there were no other checks and balances in the Bill, an individual might decide that the matter was very significant and seek a judicial review. The courts would then tell the Minister that that was a perverse and an unreasonable decision.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Charlie Elphicke
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 24 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
522 c77-8 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:26:10 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581