thereby eventually, through the binding nature of ECJ decisions, all member states recei and At the European level, the ECJ selects the "most advanced legal approaches to problems, these principles. Thus, the EC acts as a catalyst and a mediator in the process of producing a public law of a 'mixed nature. Bell remarks that a Eurostandard serves as a point of reference that can be accepted or rejected by the legal systems of the member states However, as this standard is applicable to all EC institutions, there will always be mutual influence. 17 Though European principles may only be used to fill gaps and act as correctives, the reality of 'seepage that occurs, and the force of " infiltration'andcross-fertilisation'is always there. This is reflected in one of the real ities of UK public law: the increasing importance of and the number of cases using judicial review against governmental decisions Already in 1983, Lord diplock declared that judicial review could be summarised in the principles of legality, fairness and reasonableness. 18 Lord Mustill is of the view that [t ]o avoid a vacuum in which the citizen would be left without phe dead ground in a manner, and in areas of public life, which could not have been ection against a misuse of executive powers, the courts have had no option but to occupy the dea foreseen 30 years ago. 19 And, it is now recognised that the High Court in England is a key component of the English public law system. It has even been suggested that it should be named" The Administrative court,20 Examining the balance between public and private interests, rejected for a long time by British judges, is also being established as one of the tasks of the courts, following the European trend. Recently, the Court of Appeal explained this task as: not to impede executive activity but to reconcile its continuing need to initiate or respond to change with the legitimate interests or expectations of citizens or strangers who have relied, and have been common law stance Another development impacting the public laws of the member states of the eu is he the establishment of the European Ombudsman, one of the most important achievements of Maastricht Treaty. This institution was originally to be based on a Spanish proposal supervising the rights of European citizens under Community law at national, regional and municipal levels, but was eventually based on the Danish proposal. Hence, the European Ombudsman does not supervise member states but by setting up principles of good administration for the supervision of European Institutions, a 'pollenisation'and convergence will inevitably occur. The Code of Good Administrative Behaviour prepared by the European Ombudsman lays down the principles in developing a European administrative law as lawfulness, absence of discrimination, proportionality, absence of abuse of power 7Bell, op cit, supra n 12, 161-16 18Orally v. Mackman[ 1983]2 AC 237; and also Council Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985]AC 374 9Rv. Secretaryof State for the Home Department ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995]2 All ER 244, at 268 Review of the Crown Office List(The Bowman Report, Lord Chancellors Department, March 2000) 2Rv. North and east Devon Health Authorityex parte Coughlan [2000]2 WLR 622, at647At the European level, the ECJ selects the ‘most advanced’ legal approaches to problems, and thereby eventually, through the binding nature of ECJ decisions, all member states receive these principles. Thus, the EC acts as a catalyst and a mediator in the process of producing a public law of a ‘mixed’ nature. Bell remarks that a ‘Eurostandard’ serves as a point of reference that can be accepted or rejected by the legal systems of the member states. However, as this standard is applicable to all EC institutions, there will always be mutual influence.17 Though European principles may only be used to fill gaps and act as correctives, the reality of ‘seepage’ that occurs, and the force of ‘infiltration’ and ‘cross-fertilisation’ is always there. This is reflected in one of the realities of UK public law: the increasing importance of and the number of cases using judicial review against governmental decisions. Already in 1983, Lord Diplock declared that judicial review could be summarised in the principles of ‘legality, fairness and reasonableness’.18 Lord Mustill is of the view that ‘[t]o avoid a vacuum in which the citizen would be left without protection against a misuse of executive powers, the courts have had no option but to occupy the dead ground in a manner, and in areas of public life, which could not have been foreseen 30 years ago.’19 And, it is now recognised that the High Court in England is a key component of the English public law system. It has even been suggested that it should be named ‘The Administrative Court’.20 Examining the balance between public and private interests, rejected for a long time by British judges, is also being established as one of the tasks of the courts, following the European trend. Recently, the Court of Appeal explained this task as: ‘not to impede executive activity but to reconcile its continuing need to initiate or respond to change with the legitimate interests or expectations of citizens or strangers who have relied, and have been justified in relying, on a current policy or extant promise.’21 This shows the widening scope of ‘legitimate expectations’ from procedure to substance and a departure from the strictly common law stance. Another development impacting the public laws of the member states of the EU, is the establishment of the European Ombudsman, one of the most important achievements of the Maastricht Treaty. This institution was originally to be based on a Spanish proposal supervising the rights of European citizens under Community law at national, regional and municipal levels, but was eventually based on the Danish proposal. Hence, the European Ombudsman does not supervise member states but by setting up principles of good administration for the supervision of European Institutions, a ‘pollenisation’ and a convergence will inevitably occur. The Code of Good Administrative Behaviour prepared by the European Ombudsman lays down the principles in developing a European administrative law as lawfulness, absence of discrimination, proportionality, absence of abuse of power, 17Bell, op. cit., supra n. 12, 161-162. 18Orally v. Mackman [1983] 2 AC 237; and also Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374. 19R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 All ER 244, at 268. 20Review of the Crown Office List (The Bowman Report, Lord Chancellor’s Department, March 2000). 21R v. North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan [2000] 2 WLR 622, at 647