 Before the modern judicial review procedure superseded the petition of right as the remedy for challenging the validity of a prerogative power , the courts were traditionally only willing to state whether or not powers existed , not whether they had been used appropriately . They therefore applied only the first of the Wednesbury tests : whether the use was illegal . Constitutional scholars such as William Blackstone consider this appropriate : 
 Before the modern judicial review procedure superseded the petition of right as the remedy for challenging the validity of a prerogative power , the courts <a href='uninflect' title='1'><mark>were</mark></a> traditionally only willing to state whether or not powers existed , not whether they <a href='been_done' title='2'><mark>had</mark></a> been used appropriately . They therefore applied only the first of the Wednesbury tests : whether the use was illegal . Constitutional scholars such as William Blackstone consider this appropriate : 
B4 the modern judicial review procedure superseded da petition of ryte as the remedy fa challenging the validity of a prerogative power , tdacourts was traditionally only willing to state whether or not powers existed , not whether they done been used appropriately . They therefore applied only the first of the Wednesbury tests : whether the use was illegal . Constitutional scholars such as William Blackstone consider this appropriate :