View source for Boddington v British Transport Police

{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}}
{{one source|date=September 2017}}
{{Infobox court case
|court=[[Judicial functions of the House of Lords|House of Lords]]
|date decided=2 April 1998
|full name=Boddington v British Transport Police
|citations={{plainlist|
*[1998] UKHL 13
*[1999] 2 AC 143
*[1998] 2 All ER 203
*[1998] 2 WLR 639 }}
|transcripts=
|appealed from=[[Divisional court (England and Wales)|Divisional court]]
|OpinionAnnouncement=
|opinions=
|number of judges=5
|keywords={{flatlist|
*[[Administrative law]]
*[[Judicial review]]
*[[Ultra vires]] }}
|judges={{plainlist|
*[[Lord Irvine]]
*[[Lord Browne-Wilkinson]]
*[[Lord Slynn]]
*[[Lord Steyn]]
*[[Lord Hoffmann]] }}
|prior actions=}}

{{cite bailii|litigants='''Boddington v British Transport Police'''|year=1998|court=UKHL|num=13}} is an important case in [[English administrative law]] which established the possibility of a "[[collateral challenge]]" to an allegedly unlawful administrative action.

== Facts ==
Mr Boddington was caught smoking in a railway carriage where smoking was prohibited. He was convicted and fined by a [[magistrate]] under a [[by-law]] made under the [[Transport Act 1962]].

== Judgment ==
On [[appeal]], the question was whether Mr Boddington was entitled to raise, as a defence, the invalidity of the by-law under which he had been convicted. The difficulty was that the normal path for having an administrative action declared unlawful and invalid is an application for [[judicial review]] – which Mr Boddington had not brought.

The [[House of Lords]] held unanimously that he was entitled to bring a so-called collateral challenge in the criminal proceedings. [[Lord Irvine of Lairg|Lord Irvine]], then [[Lord Chancellor]], and [[Johan Steyn, Baron Steyn|Lord Steyn]] gave the leading speeches. On the facts, however, Mr Boddington's challenge failed, and his appeal against conviction was dismissed.

== Legacy ==
Collateral challenges are an important means, alternative to an application for judicial review, of attacking the validity of an administrative action. Although collateral challenges had been permitted in [[English law]] before ''Boddington'', the case is notable for strongly asserting their continuing relevance in modern law and rooting them in [[Liberalism|liberal]] values.

''Boddington'' was adopted into [[Law of South Africa|South African law]] by the [[Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa|Supreme Court of Appeal]] in ''Oudekraal Estates (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others''.<ref>''Oudekraal Estates (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others'' [2004] ZASCA 48, 2004 (6) SA 222 (SCA)</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:House of Lords cases]]
[[Category:1998 in United Kingdom case law]]
[[Category:United Kingdom administrative case law]]


{{case-law-stub}}