header-logo header-logo

23 February 2022
Issue: 7968 / Categories: Legal News , Judicial review , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Lords on judicial review

Peers should consider whether the introduction of suspended or prospective-only quashing orders in judicial reviews correctly balance ‘providing courts with discretion and placing a presumption on how they should act’, the House of Lords Constitution Committee has said

In its report on the Judicial Review and Courts Bill it highlighted ‘some academic disagreement’ as to whether judges were being given discretionary powers or if the orders were mandatory. The committee reported that it has ‘recommended removing the requirement for judges to make suspended or prospective-only quashing orders where they would provide adequate redress and there would not be a good reason not to’.

It also recommended that courts be required to give due consideration to Art 13, ECHR when making the determination. Committee Stage began this week in the House of Lords.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll