MsR has tagged me with the latest “What are you reading” meme:
WHAT ARE YOU READING?
The rules:
1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people
OK. Here goes:
“These reasons are built into the procedures of the application for judicial review, which requires for example an application to quash a decision to be brought within a limited time. A decision not challenged within that time, whether or not it would have been declared unlawful if challenged, and whether or not unlawful for jurisdictional error, retains legal effect. So does a decision found to be unlawful but where remedy is, in the court’s discretion, withheld.”
Principles of Judicial Review, De Smith, Woolf & Jowell’s
I tag, at random, CharonQC, Ruthie, Lawminx, Alex Cartwright and moon23 and Dan Hull.
I would like to appeal the random decision to tag Lawminx, your Geekness, given that she has already been tagged with this meme once and was forced to recount such passages from the White Book therein as to make her readers, to say nothing of her good self, voluntarily chew off the fourth fingers of their left hands…….
I’ll agree to discharge the meme tag for you, in the circumstances.
Creed shook his head. ‘I need you closer.’
It was exactly what Jeds had been waiting to hear, but he kept his voice level.
Rupert Thompson ‘The Five Gates of Hell’
You know I actually considered pretending that I was reading something more edgy and filthy like the Marquis De Sade or Prezza’s new memoirs,
“Nevertheless, attempts to challenge entry were made on the ground that it constituted an abuse of prerogative treaty-making power to the extent that it would undermine the sovereignty of Parliament, and on the ground also that the Treaty would breach art 18 of the Treaty of Union of 1707.”
(2 references, ‘2′ and ‘3′ omitted ‘cos of lack of html capabilities on Geek’s site).
So, guess the title.
(Curiously, I’m reading chapters 30 and 31 of said book which is about judicial review).
ps wrt the quote above … what do you all think of Blackburn?
What do I think of Blackburn? Nothing. I have no interest in football.
Why was I not tagged - now you die.
Because you are such a rubbish stalker
What!! I read your blog, I make the odd comment AND threats - what more is required of this stalking malarkey! Anyway its not about the intensity it’s about the consistency.
I’m quite pleased that I wasn’t tagged. Be thrilled juxta, be thrilled.
Though a contract hit on Geekie is never a bad idea.
I was tagging only lawyers my dear Mary.
I realised that Mr Geek when I saw the tag list.
I am not hurt at all, I’m just trying to reassure Juxta that it isn’t the end of the world if she’s been left out.
Yes it is.
once again, you are hurting my chances to reassure a member of your harem
You can have my tag if you like, Juxta!
Thanks minxy, but no. You see I’m reading about the horror that is the Indigenous Australian relationship with the criminal justice system, I’ve already passed page 123, the idea of going back, even for geeky, is just too much. Horror is best brushed aside and only revisited in times of examination or certain death. Besides I tire of this tag talk. Judicial scandal anyone?
The 6th edition?
No the new abridged edition of the 5th edition. is there a 6th edition bloody well hope not or Hammicks are selling old stock.
I’m thinking Judicial Review and Administrative Action (6th ed. December 2007). Big red book.
Nope: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Smith-Jowells-Principles-Judicial-Review/dp/042162020X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208976416&sr=1-2
1999?! Abridged? That’s the student edition!
Yes the student edition - I’m a barrister & have to pay for my own library library unlike Allen & Ovaries with their £2000/hr assistant solicitors. Regrettably I couldn’t find “Judicial Review for Dummies”, a snip at £20.
I give you a meme, you fucking whinge and then you get all these people commenting and I get measly eight. Eight. And one of them was me. That’s the last time I give you anything. I am too good to you.
I shall go and read what the other lawyers have done.
Think long term MsR. And anyway, I’ll let you buy me an ice-lolly for the 8.
To all loyal readers: shut this cow up go and visit her blog.
Blimey, you think some’d be grateful. Still, I am stoned on some antique weed so I don’t care …
Lot of words to say ‘If you’re too late, ‘F*** Off’…..
Hey would love to borrow that book sometime as a cure for my insomnia.
Talking of judicial review …
Consider this job a tell me whether or not you think that the criteria are rational?
Compare to this one and tell me whether or not the first one is justified and if so, on what rational criteria?
ps Not that Blackburn; the other one.
vigorous robust issues partnership capacity building - of course it’s going to pay more than a lawyer so useless they have to consider working for a LA.
next?
ahem. where’s my tag? noobs…
Aw bugger - I knew someone was going to get the hump.
GL… Christ… for a moment I thought I was going to be tagged and have a curfew because I hadn’t cut my hedge.
I’ll deal with the meme soon….. the book nearest to me is just too embarrassing to open at page 123…. from what I recall a story of frustration and discharge. Treitel, The Law of Contract.
I must keep your blog “office safe”. I’ll find another book.