header-logo header-logo

Judicial review: reading the runes

11 February 2022 / John Cleverly , Azeem Suterwalla
Issue: 7966 / Categories: Opinion , Constitutional law , Judicial review
printer mail-detail
71764
John Cleverly & Azeem Suterwalla consider the potentially far-reaching & unexpected effects of proposals in the Judicial Review and Courts Bill

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill has now entered the House of Lords. It will not likely be brought into effect until early to mid-2022. While we consider that the Bill does not have the far-reaching constitutional implications that some have suggested, the introduction of suspended quashing orders could in fact allow some claims to succeed that would previously have failed.

Suspended quashing orders

The Bill would introduce a new provision (29A) into the Senior Courts Act 1981 (the 1981 Act) which would allow judges to ‘undo’ (or ‘quash’) something that the government has done from a particular point in time. Previously, the relief that was available to a claimant was to have a court decide that the government’s actions were unlawful and had effectively never been taken. That is clearly quite a dramatic order for a court to make.

Now, if the Bill becomes law, courts

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll