header-logo header-logo

Judicial review: under review

Is the current government a threat to the independence of the judiciary? Amanda Robinson & David Wolchover review the evidence

On 14 February 2020, Amanda Pinto QC, Chair of the Bar Council, highlighted concerns about the Prime Minister’s proposals for a constitutional commission to examine the role of judicial review challenges and whether judges were trespassing on political territory. Five months on, the Prime Minister’s proposal is now reality with the government announcing last Friday that an independent panel, chaired by Lord Edward Faulks QC, will consider whether the right balance is being struck between the rights of citizens to challenge executive decisions and the need for effective and efficient government. It is our contention that the threat or potential threat to the judiciary is far greater, if the government’s words and actions are taken at face value.

Boris  Johnson: a potted history

The Prime Minister is no stranger to challenges over his apparent indifference to testimonial exactitude, to deploy a euphemism coined by the historical colossus he so

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll