Wednesbury unreasonableness
|
|
Wednesbury unreasonableness is a term that is used to refer to the principle enunciated in the case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corporation [ 1948 ] 1 KB 223 — courts will not intervene to correct a bad administrative decision on grounds of unreasonableness, unless such decision is extremely unreasonable.
Facts of the case
"Associated Provincial Picture Houses" were granted a licence by the defendant local authority to operate a cinema if no children under 15 were admitted to the cinema. The claimants sought a declaration that such a condition was unacceptable, and outside the power of the Wednesbury Corporation to impose. The court held that for it to intervene and overturn the decision of the defendant corporation, the condition would have to be so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would ever consider imposing it. The court held that such a condition did not fall into the category of being so unreasonable that it would not be reasonably considered by such a public authority. Therefore, the claim failed and the decision of the Wednesbury Corporation was upheld.
Use of this case
This case or the principle known as "Wednesbury unreasonableness" are cited in British courts as a reason for courts to be hesitant to interfere into the decisions of administrative law bodies.
Compare: patently unreasonable, fairness, fundamental justice and due process.