header-logo header-logo

04 June 2021 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7935 / Categories: Features , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

What future for judicial review?

50417
How stands the government’s reform of judicial review? Michael Zander QC gives a pessimistic assessment
  • Can the virtual unanimity against the need for legislative reform of judicial review succeed in affecting the government’s plans?

The news in the Queen’s Speech that the legislative programme would include a Judicial Review Reform Bill came only days after the close of the government’s six-week consultation on the report of the Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL), chaired by Lord Faulks. Though the subject is one that obviously deserves mature and careful thought, the signs are that the government plans to rush ahead.

Every aspect of this process has been rushed. There was widespread complaint that the timeframe for IRAL was inadequate. The Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA) is bringing judicial review proceedings to establish that the consultation on the IRAL’s report was unlawful in not affording adequate time for consideration and response.

IRAL was plainly Boris Johnson’s response to defeat in the Supreme Court in the two Miller

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll