Judicial Review Reforms

Tuesday 2 July 2013

The Government’s hotly anticipated reforms to the judicial review process were implemented yesterday.

Judicial review is a legal process where an applicant with a ‘sufficient interest’ in a decision made by a public body can apply to the Court to ask a Judge to review the lawfulness of that decision.

The Court in a judicial review application is not necessarily concerned with the substantive decision but instead with the process that was used to reach that decision.

Traditionally judicial review has been seen as a remedy of last resort and should only be used where all other methods of redress have been exhausted. However Chris Grayling, the current Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice , considers that an increasing number of applications for judicial review are burdening the Courts and public authorities. In 2012 there were in excess of 11,000 applications for judicial review and only 1 in 6 was granted permission to proceed to a judicial review hearing.

The changes that took effect yesterday are aimed at relieving the pressure on the already burdened administrative Court system. The reforms are threefold:

1.       A reduction to the limitation period – Any application for judicial review made prior to 1 July 2013 had to be issued within three months after the grounds to make the application first arose and needed to be made promptly. This was the position irrespective of the subject matter of the application.

However the limitation period for an application for judicial review will now vary depending on the subject of the application.

Any application for a judicial review of a ‘planning decision’ must be lodged promptly and within 6 weeks of the decision.

Any application for a judicial review of a decision relating to a procurement matter must be lodged promptly and within 30 days of the decision.

2.      Oral hearings – Previously if an application for judicial review was refused permission to proceed on paper it was possible to appeal that decision to an oral hearing. This will no longer be possible for applications issued after 1 July 2013 if a Judge has ruled that application is ‘totally without merit’. Any appeal of such a ‘totally without merit’ application will be on paper only to the Court of Appeal.

3.      Increase in fees – If an application for judicial review is refused permission to proceed but not judged as ‘totally without merit’, a fee of £215 will be charged for an oral hearing to appeal that decision. This fee is likely to rise to £235 when the Government’s separate consultation on Court fees is implemented.

There has been some concern surrounding the changes to the judicial review process and the impact it will have on litigants in person. The ability of individuals to ask a Court to review the lawfulness of a decision made by a public body is seen by many as an important constitutional right that should not be curtailed.

At Blacks we have specialist experience of dealing with applications for judicial review and in view of the strict time limits involved would advise you to contact us as soon as possible if you would like to issue an application for judicial review.