It is not entirely clear whether the same is true of the impact of judicial review on public authoritie5_ Applications for judicial review are usually retrospective challenges to decisions or actions already taken. To that extent, the individual cases will, as Dr Hugh Rawlings suggested, normally be sporadic, peripheral and temporary.“ 30 far as it is sporadic rather than regular and predictable in its incidence, it will not allow the principles of judicial review to operate effectively as ‘inhibitory’ rules. To be effective, they will have to achieve ‘working rule‘ status; other- wise they will be, at best, ‘presentational’.