header-logo header-logo

23 May 2013 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7561 / Categories: Opinion , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Get your facts straight

hires_13

The government needs to review its case against judicial review, says Jon Robins

“The ‘144’ figure touted by the Lord Chancellor is not just misleading, it’s meaningless.”

On Radio 4’s Today programme at the end of last month the Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling, offered the following killer statistic by way of illustration of the true horror of the judicial review “problem”. “In 2011, there were 11,359 applications for judicial review,” he told listeners. “In the end, 144 were successful and all of the rest of them tied up government lawyers, local authority lawyers in time, in expense for a huge number of cases of which virtually none were successful.”

Damning statistics?

So, on our Lord Chancellor’s analysis, less than 1.5% of judicial reviews (JRs) were successful which, surely, suggests that something has gone very wrong with this most crucial legal mechanism for holding government and its agencies to account. “We’re not saying there shouldn’t be JR,” Grayling told John Humphrys. “We’re not saying that members of the public and organisations should

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll