header-logo header-logo

30 July 2021 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7943 / Categories: Features , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Reform of judicial review

53845
Michael Zander QC on whether the Judicial Review and Courts Bill is a cause for concern
  • Whether the Bill is a threat turns basically on the extent to which judges are likely to move away from their traditional approach and get them instead to adopt the government’s agenda.
  • The Independent Review of Administrative Law’s recommendation that Cart be overturned is being given effect.

Of the 48 clauses of the Judicial Review and Courts Bill published last week only the first two are about judicial review (JR). Clause 1, inserting new s 29A in the Senior Courts Act 1981, gives the judges the power to make suspended and prospective quashing orders. Clause 2 overturns the Supreme Court’s decision in Cart thereby preventing use of JR to challenge a decision of the Upper Tribunal refusing permission to appeal against a decision of the First-Tier Tribunal.

Quashing Orders

New s 29A(1) states: ‘A quashing order may include provision— (a) for the quashing not to take effect until a date specified

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

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll