R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal [2012] 1 AC 663

Facts

  • Mr. Cart’s appeal concerning his child’s special educational needs was rejected by the Upper Tribunal.
  • He sought judicial review, alleging legal errors by the Upper Tribunal.
  • The main focus was whether the Upper Tribunal, as designated a "superior court of record" by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, should be exempt from judicial review except in limited circumstances, or remain subject to broader court oversight.
  • Mr. Cart argued that restricting judicial review would undermine legal checks and the protection of fundamental rights.

Issues

  1. Whether the Upper Tribunal’s decisions should be largely exempt from judicial review by virtue of its status as a "superior court of record".
  2. In what circumstances, if any, judicial review should be available against the Upper Tribunal.
  3. How judicial oversight should balance administrative efficiency and the need for legal accountability of specialist tribunals.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court declined to grant total immunity from judicial review to the Upper Tribunal.
  • Judicial review was confirmed as essential for maintaining legal oversight over tribunal decisions.
  • The Court established that review of the Upper Tribunal’s decisions should occur only in specific, limited circumstances, notably where an "important point of principle or practice" is raised or some other compelling reason exists.
  • The Court’s measured approach balanced the Tribunal’s specialist function with practical efficiency and individual rights protection.

Legal Principles

  • Judicial review is a fundamental mechanism for ensuring administrative bodies operate within legal bounds.
  • Even specialist tribunals, such as the Upper Tribunal, remain subject to judicial supervision to prevent legal errors and protect individual rights.
  • The test for permitting judicial review in this context is whether the case involves an "important point of principle or practice" or another compelling justification for intervention.
  • The Cart judgment influences the criteria for reviewing decisions of specialist tribunals, contributing to the structure and predictability of administrative law.
  • The legal standard set out in Cart has since been shaped by subsequent cases relating to the oversight of specialist tribunals.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in R (Cart) v Upper Tribunal affirmed that judicial review remains available for Upper Tribunal decisions only on significant legal grounds, maintaining oversight while respecting the Tribunal’s specialist knowledge and supporting administrative efficiency. This balance continues to shape the field of administrative justice and judicial scrutiny of specialist tribunals.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal