header-logo header-logo

01 August 2025 / Jasveer Randhawa
Issue: 8127 / Categories: Features , Public , Local authority , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Public law update

226815
Jasveer Randhawa explores some of the recent themes to emerge in English public law
  • Courts are narrowing the circumstances in which the Gunning principles apply, signalling more leeway for public bodies to engage stakeholders without triggering formal consultation obligations.
  • Recent cases also highlight a spectrum of contractual arrangements intersecting with statutory duties.
  • Judges are embracing a flexible, consequence-focused approach to reasonableness, affirming the role of judicial review in scrutinising public decisions.

Public law is a fast moving and highly specialised area. In this article, I consider some recent trends and themes in English public law, focusing on three substantive areas: consultation, the intersection between public and private law, and rationality/reasonableness review.

Consultation

Consultation has long been a fertile ground of challenge in judicial review, but recent case law has re-examined when the Gunning principles (R v Brent London Borough Council ex p Gunning (1985) 84 LGR 168) apply—an area that was previously considered settled.

The Court of Appeal first tackled the issue in R (Secretary

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
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?
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
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
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll