header-logo header-logo

27 September 2022
Categories: Legal News , Judicial review , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

LNB NEWS: Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2022 published

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has published updated guidance for court users in England and Wales conducting judicial review in the Administrative Court. 

Lexis®Library update: The Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2022 provides general information on how litigation should be conducted, including the relevant statutory provisions, rules of procedure, practice directions and case law on the procedural aspects of judicial review. The guide also includes contact details for the court, information on forms and fees and current addresses for serving documents on government departments. 

The 2022 edition replaces the 2021 edition, and the large majority of the content is unchanged, but revisions have been made to the main body of the guidance and the annexes. Key changes include the removal of specific provisions concerning coronavirus (COVID-19), the inclusion of a quick reference flow diagram of the judicial review process, the addition of a new section 19 on closed material proceedings, plus new and amended guidance taking account of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 (eg under remedies and procedures where the Upper Tribunal is the defendant).

The guide is intended to apply in the Administrative Court and Administrative Court Offices in England and Wales. It does not have the force of law but parties using the Administrative Court are expected to adhere to it. The guide specifies that applicable rules and cases should be drawn to the court’s attention where relevant, rather than merely relying on the guide.

Note: This edition of the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide does not take in anticipated amendments removing references to CPR PD 4 (Forms), and updating references necessary to reflect the change of monarch. CPR form amendments have been approved and amended forms will be published in due course. Further details are available here.

Source: Administrative Court judicial review guide 2022

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 26 September 2022 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll