header-logo header-logo

03 December 2021 / Matthew Smith
Issue: 7959 / Categories: Opinion , Judicial review , Rule of law
printer mail-detail

Judicial review: a process under pressure

66006
Matthew Smith gets under the skin of the government’s concerns about judicial overreach

Judicial review has found itself in the government’s crosshairs on several occasions in the last decade or so. Ministers asserted again and again during that period that immigration judicial review took up too much time and resource; that unmeritorious judicial review cases of all types clogged up the system and led to delay; and that too much judicial review was brought to prolong unsuccessful political campaigns, with the attendant risk that the judiciary would stray into matters not properly for them.

The most recent road to reform began with the launch—in July 2020—of the Independent Review of Administrative Law, referred to universally now as IRAL. Despite its name, the focus was on judicial review, rather than the wider field of administrative law; but even so, there was, initially at least, considerable concern among legal practitioners that it would generate far-reaching proposals and threaten the pivotal role played by judicial review in upholding the rule of law.

This

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
back-to-top-scroll