The Supreme Court in Shvidler reaffirmed that courts must conduct their own proportionality assessments, though they must give weight to executive judgments; Lord Leggatt’s dissent warned against judicial deference that ‘abdicates responsibility’.
Challenges to the Online Safety Act highlighted potential conflicts between Category 1 duties and freedom of expression, with the court signalling that future ECHR challenges remain possible.
Under the National Security and Investment Act, a divestment order survived scrutiny despite acknowledged severity, illustrating courts’ reluctance to second-guess national security decisions.
Meanwhile, the boundary between contract and public law remained contested in cases involving Building Safety Act schemes.
Finally, strict time-limit rulings underscore that promptness—often faster than three months—is essential in judicial review.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
