Pearlman v Keepers and Governors of Harrow School [1979] QB 56

If it is your determination that the issue relates to a question of fact, then you are called upon to ascertain whether the fact at issue is jurisdictional, in the sense that it has a bearing upon whether the decision-maker has the power to make the decision. For example, if a decision-making body has the ability to set a fair rent for ‘furnished accommodation’, then the issue of whether the accommodation is in fact furnished or not goes to the jurisdiction of that body. Lord Diplock held that such issues of jurisdictional fact are par excellence justicable (ie capable of review). If, on the other hand, your determination is that you are dealing with a question of law, then Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission (1969) would lead us to conclude that all errors of law go to the jurisdiction of the decision-making body. If this interpretation of Anisminic, as upheld by Lord Denning MR in Pearlman v Keepers & Governors of Harrow School (1979), is correct, then the old ground of error of law on the face of the record becomes redundant.