SOAS Public Law Coursework II 2010-11 You are required to give an opinion as to whether both the situations set out below would be amenable for a judicial review but you are not required to discuss the grounds of review. (i) Val was a single mother with two children who was granted a tenancy in a two bed roomed maisonette owned by Singleton Council pursuant to the council’s duty to rehouse under the Homeless and Housing Act (fictional). After eighteen months the property was transferred to Hometrust, an independent housing association, set up by the council. Shortly afterwards, Val had a dispute with one of her neighbours which resulted in a heated exchange of words and a slamming of doors. This was reported and she was subject to a disciplinary procedure organised by Hometrust. Without being given the benefit of legal representation or a hearing she was found guilty and informed by Hometrust that her tenancy agreement would be terminated in six months time. This would mean that Val would be made homeless. Advise Val whether she would be able use the judicial review procedure to argue that her rights under Article 6 and Article 8 of the ECHR have been breached. (ii) Under the Ancient Monuments Act (fictitious) the Secretary of State has the power to list for preservation purposes important remains of archaeological or of historical interest. While digging the foundations of a new building for Globe Developments in the centre of Barchester, Ron discovers several well preserved pieces of Roman glass. The find is reported in the local and national TV, radio and press. Despite the growing interest in the find the Secretary of State has decided without giving any reasons not to list the site and Globe Developments will soon lay concrete foundations which would mean that the site would not be further excavated by archaeologists and preserved. Bill and Sachin are keen amateur archaeologists who live two hundred miles away in London. To further the wider preservation of antiquity they have set up the Roman Antiquities Foundation as a charity to promote the excavation and study of Roman remains. Advise both the Roman Antiquities Foundation and Bill and Sachin as individuals whether they would be in a position to challenge the decision of the Secretary of State under the judicial review procedure. Note that this is not a question on the substantive grounds of review. Both parts of the answer should not exceed 1200 words. Relevant case law must be referred to. The work should be referenced with footnotes and word processed in font size 12. The hand in deadline is Wednesday 2 March 2011.