Judicial review does not need legislative reform

04 November 2020 / Michael Zander KC

Issue: 7909 / Categories: Features , Judicial review

Michael Zander on what the authors of De Smith have told the Government’s inquiry

The Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL), chaired by Lord Faulks QC, has been asked by the Government: ‘Does judicial review strike the right balance between enabling citizens to challenge the lawfulness of government action and allowing the executive and local authorities to carry on the business of government?’ It would be naïve to ignore the reality that the question comes with a heavily loaded political agenda. The inquiry closed the portal for submissions on 26 October 2020 and is asked to report by the end of the year.

The authors of the leading work on the subject, De Smith’s Judicial Review (Sir Jeffrey Jowell QC, Ivan Hare QC, Catherine Donnelly SC and Lord Woolf), have, at my request, very kindly allowed me to publicise their 19-page submission to the Faulks inquiry. (To read the De Smith response in full please visit https://bit.ly/2GoTGkZ.)

Codification?

The Review asks: ‘Whether the amenability of public law decisions

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

Judicial review does not need legislative reform

Michael Zander on what the authors of De Smith have told the Government’s inquiry

Codification?

The Review asks: ‘Whether the amenability of public law decisions

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS

Read All

Public Accounts Committee warn of ‘extinction’ risk for legal aid

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned

NLJ this week: The insider returns

Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome

NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt

After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights

NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers

The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains

NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was

Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously

Error message

Judicial review does not need legislative reform

Codification?

Codification?

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly