Analyse the extent to which the rules of standing and the grounds of Essay

Analyse the extent to which the rules of standing and the grounds of judicial review have struck the right balance between helpi - Essay Example The law of standing  comprises  rules that determine, whether the remedy seeker is a bonafide person or is he legally empower to initiate legal proceeding against the defendant. We have noticed that in private matters, it is very difficult for the victims to seek justice due to lack of legal resources and the hefty cost involves in initiating legal course of action against the party at fault. Hence, visible hurdles for the litigants in the matter of public interest are there2. Public interest litigation may be common in the developed countries, but it seldom seen in the developing countries due to cost incurs on public interest litigation. Enforcement of public right most often requires due role of public bodies in administrating and implementing such functions e.g. health, safety, security or the environment. There is a difference between the public interest litigation and the private interest litigation. In the UK legal system, there is a body of common law and the statutes whi ch revolves around the exceptions with regard to the rule of standing that lacks the protection of public right3. In the mentioned legal system, judicial review is exercised under RSC, order 53 to ensure judicial control over administrative action. The matter of each and every judicial review is a decision that made by some authorized person or persons is/are called decision maker/makers. They have the right to take the decision or refuse to take the decision4. It is (Judicial review) by all standards different from an appeal. The clear distinction is that appeal can be filed in the appellate jurisdiction by the petitioner provided the judgment of the subordinate court did not touch upon the legal or technical aspects of the case whereas the judicial review is connected with the legal aspect of the decision only or the specified act5. Judicial Review Judicial review has the strong relationship with the powerful executives in terms of accountability. It is the constitutional obligati ons of the judiciary to control the misuse of power of the executives. Of course, executives do not like the judicial review against the backdrop of unbridled discretionary powers they are being enjoyed. On the other hand, judiciary encourages the law abiders and the rules comply with executives to carry out their jobs without any fear or favour. In the presence of strong judiciary, the executives should not comply with the illegal orders of their superiors6. In the English legal system, everybody is accountable to his or her deeds. It is the essence of the cited legal system that the actions or the decisions of the executives are subject to judicial review by judges in order to ensure that their actions or decisions are in accordance with law. Further, the judges have the authority to examine the suggested changes in the legislative structure whether they are in line with the constitutional requirement. Judicial review is utmost important keeping in mind the â€Å"power corrupts a nd absolute power corrupts absolutely â€Å". From the aforementioned contents, it is clear that the basic responsibility to address the legal lacunas in the decisions of