The Judicial Review and Courts Bill committee heard evidence on the Bill this month from the Law Society and others. The Bill proposes a statutory presumption in favour of prospective-only remedies, which would leave past wrongs to stand and impose limits on when judges could right a past wrong.
Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘One of the changes the government wants to make is to push judges towards rulings that would leave people who suffered because of unlawful state actions without full redress.
‘This is plainly wrong and would have a chilling effect on justice. Individuals and businesses should have confidence that where public bodies breach the law or infringe on legal rights they will be able to enforce their rights and secure redress.
‘We support the introduction of suspended quashing orders, which would allow a judge to give the state time to make necessary arrangements before their decision takes effect. However, this should only be at judges’ discretion and not, as is proposed, the norm which could only be deviated from in prescribed circumstances.
‘All in all, the ultimate consequence of these proposals would be that more unlawful actions by public bodies could go unchallenged or untouched.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
