Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
p 45

... a recent pronouncement of this court, in Re Kelly's Application* [2018] NIQB 8, at [9]: "In my judgement the fundamental flaw in this challenge is that it is brought in a legal and factual vacuum. It has no legal framework since it is not concerned with an actual decision of the Secretary of State, a proposed decision of the Secretary of State, an explicit refusal by the Secretary of State to exercise any of the powers, duties, functions or discretions conferred by [the 1998 Act], a failure by the Secretary of State to do so or, finally, a failure to consider whether to do so. Consequential upon this analysis, the Applicant's challenge has no factual framework either. It is entirely devoid of context. Absent a concrete context, I consider that there nothing to which the relevant common law principles fall to be applied. These principles are entirely dormant at the moment. They have no role in the setting of the Applicant's unavoidably vague and speculative case that a factual and legal context might arise in some unspecified circumstances on some unpredicted future date.
The family name, Sumption, is reminiscent of some character in some novel by Chas. Dickens. I might have mentioned.
* citing court opinion, uncontested litigation

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Fri Sep 13th, 2019 at 05:15:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Oui 4