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

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