header-logo header-logo

Judicial review refused

29 November 2024 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Features , Judicial review , Nuisance
printer mail-detail
199170
Does the existence of a suitable alternative remedy rule out the option of judicial review? Nicholas Dobson weighs up the Supreme Court’s view
  • The Court of Appeal was wrong to dismiss the appeal on the basis of a suitable alternative remedy.
  • It should have considered whether there were good grounds of appeal on the claim’s merits. The case was remitted accordingly to the Court of Appeal.

Judicial review is a claim to review the lawfulness of (among other things) ‘a decision, action or failure to act in relation to the exercise of a public function’ (Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 54(1)). Court permission is needed for a judicial review claim (CPR 54(4)). Forms of judicial review relief are discretionary, as is the procedure itself. For instance, per s 31(2) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, a declaration may be made, or injunction granted, where the High Court considers, having regard (among other things) to all the circumstances of the case, ‘it would be just and convenient for the declaration to be

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—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll