Ever since theWednesburydecision in 1947, United Kingdom public law has been applying the concepts of ‘rationality’ and ‘reasonableness’ indistinguishably. Rationality has also been used as a ‘mega-ground of judicial review’, covering many other, distinct grounds of review. The main purpose of this article is to promote conceptual clarity in UK public law by highlighting the overlooked differences between reasonableness and rationality, indicating the nature of rationality as a distinct ground of judicial review and explaining why it should not be used as a mega-ground of review. It is argued that (i) reasonableness is in its essence a balancing and weighing test; (ii) the most accurate way of understanding rationality review in public law is to perceive it as ‘instrumental rationality’ or as a ‘suitability test’ which reviews the logical and causal connection between means and end; (iii) this ‘instrumental’ perception of rationality is already applied in UK public law as part of the proportionality test; (iv) rationality, unlike reasonableness, is not a weighing and balancing test; thus it is wrong to use the concepts of ‘reasonableness review’ and ‘rationality review’ indistinguishably; and (v) it is conceptually wrong and confusing to use rationality as a ‘mega-ground of review’.

中文翻译：

---

理性作为英国公法司法审查的明确依据的真正意义

自从温斯伯里在 1947 年的决定中，英国公法一直在应用“合理性”和“合理性”的概念，没有区别。理性也被用作“司法审查的大理由”，涵盖了许多其他不同的审查理由。本文的主要目的是通过强调合理性和合理性之间被忽视的差异，指出合理性作为司法审查的独特基础的性质，并解释为什么不应将其用作大基础，从而促进英国公法的概念清晰的审查。有人认为 (i) 合理性本质上是一种平衡和权衡测试；(ii) 在公法中理解合理性审查的最准确方式是将其视为“工具合理性”或审查手段与目的之间的逻辑和因果关系的“适用性测试”；(iii) 这种对理性的“工具性”感知已作为比例测试的一部分应用于英国公法；(iv) 与合理性不同，合理性不是衡量和平衡的测试；因此，将“合理性审查”和“合理性审查”的概念混为一谈是错误的；(v) 将理性用作“审查的大理由”在概念上是错误的和令人困惑的。因此，将“合理性审查”和“合理性审查”的概念混为一谈是错误的；(v) 将理性用作“审查的大理由”在概念上是错误的和令人困惑的。因此，将“合理性审查”和“合理性审查”的概念混为一谈是错误的；(v) 将理性用作“审查的大理由”在概念上是错误的和令人困惑的。