Pearlman v Keepers and Governors of Harrow School [1979] QB ...

Facts

• Mr. Pearlman was a tenant of Harrow School, challenging a rent assessment made by the school’s surveyor under the Rent Act 1968.
• The county court upheld the surveyor’s decision regarding the fair rent.
• Mr. Pearlman appealed, contending that the surveyor had misapplied the Rent Act’s rules for determining fair rent, constituting an error of law.

Issues

1. Whether a legal error made by an administrative decision-maker within the scope of their authority is reviewable by the courts.
2. Whether such an error of law invalidates the administrative decision.

Decision

• The Court of Appeal, led by Lord Denning MR, determined that a legal error affecting the outcome of a decision rendered it invalid, even if made within the decision-maker’s legal authority.
• The court dismissed prior distinctions between errors that nullified decisions and those that did not, concluding that any error of law impacting the result could justify judicial intervention.
• The decision in favour of Mr. Pearlman resulted in the rent assessment being cancelled.
• Lords Justice Ormrod and Geoffrey Lane concurred, endorsing increased judicial power to correct legal errors in administrative decisions.

Legal Principles

• The scope of judicial review was expanded to include legal errors made within the jurisdiction of administrative authorities where such errors affected the outcome.
• Pearlman applied and extended reasoning from Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, adopting a broader interpretation of reviewable errors of law.
• Later cases, including R v Lord President of the Privy Council, ex parte Page [1993] AC 682, refined these principles, recognising exceptions (e.g., academic judgments) but generally reinforcing judicial scrutiny of legal mistakes.
• Administrative bodies are required to interpret and apply statutes accurately, with errors of law susceptible to judicial review.

Conclusion

Pearlman v Keepers and Governors of Harrow School marked a significant development in administrative law by enabling courts to review and overturn decisions for legal errors, even when made within jurisdiction. This approach enhanced judicial supervision of administrative actions and set a precedent for greater accountability and accuracy in decision-making by public bodies.