header-logo header-logo

Lords on judicial review

23 February 2022
Issue: 7968 / Categories: Legal News , Judicial review , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Peers should consider whether the introduction of suspended or prospective-only quashing orders in judicial reviews correctly balance ‘providing courts with discretion and placing a presumption on how they should act’, the House of Lords Constitution Committee has said

In its report on the Judicial Review and Courts Bill it highlighted ‘some academic disagreement’ as to whether judges were being given discretionary powers or if the orders were mandatory. The committee reported that it has ‘recommended removing the requirement for judges to make suspended or prospective-only quashing orders where they would provide adequate redress and there would not be a good reason not to’.

It also recommended that courts be required to give due consideration to Art 13, ECHR when making the determination. Committee Stage began this week in the House of Lords.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll