Judicial review provides value for money and an important route to fair treatment for individuals. Government Defeated In Legal Aid Test Plan. Judges have overturned Government plans to deny legal aid to people who have not lived in the UK continuously for at least 12 months. The Supreme Court announced it is to allow an appeal by campaigners against proposals for a so-called residence test, which they argued restricted access to justice for foreign-born individuals in civil cases.
The ruling was a victory for legal charity Public Law Project (PLP), represented by law firm Bindmans. The residence test would have restricted civic legal aid to people who have lived in the UK, Crown dependencies or British overseas territories continuously for a period of at least 12 months at the time they applied for aid. But human rights campaigners had warned the plans would have had a particularly serious impact on recently arrived migrants and their children. A panel of seven Supreme Court justices agreed and ruled that if implemented the move would constitute an act ultra vires (beyond legal authority). ‘A Moment of Genuine Legal History’ The title of this post is taken from the BBC’s analysis of this case as I couldn’t have put it better – the ‘joint enterprise’ ruling in Feb 2016 was ‘a moment of genuine legal history’ and about the best example a student of Judiciary in Unit 2 can have. In brief, the ‘joint enterprise’ law has been used to convict people for murder.
“The joint enterprise law has been used to convict people in gang-related cases if defendants “could” have foreseen violent acts by their associates” (BBC). This has been used to convict ‘murderers’ such as those who killed Stephen Lawrence, a young man stabbed to death in 1993. “For years, juries were told that to convict the other gang members, they simply had to be sure that they foresaw the possibility that the killing might occur.” (BBC) The role of the Judiciary is to interpret the law as passed by government. For the last 30 years, this was the interpretation of ‘joint enterprise’ that has been accepted by the Courts in the UK. Like this: How many judicial review cases are received by UK government departments? Government insists judicial challenges are now so frequent that they must be curbed in law. But the numbers don't seem to back this up. During the debate in parliament on Monday 1 Dec 2014, Chris Grayling (Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice) was asked how many Judicial Review cases are brought against government ministers.
Julie Hilling (Bolton West) (Lab): The right hon. Gentleman says “all the time”. Chris Grayling: A Minister is confronted by the practical threat of the arrival of a judicial review case virtually every week of the year. The minister gave no actual numbers in his answer. There is a good discussion of the wider issues raised by Chris Grayling’s responses during that debate by Mark Elliot on the Public Law for Everyone blog. The number of JR cases received by each UK government department can be found in this database of JR cases from 2007 to 2012, which lists over 57,000 JR applications, giving the topic, defendant and outcome of each case. Judicial Review. This section contains information and guidance about judicial review in England and Wales. For initial information about Scotland, please click here , and for Northern Ireland, please click here The aim of this page is to provide a resource for organisations, individuals or groups who want to understand judicial review with with a view to making a legal challenge against the public spending cuts.
The information is split into the following sections: 1. What is judicial review? 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Judicial review is the process used by courts to examine the decisions made by public bodies, to make sure that they are lawful and fair. Public bodies whose decisions may be challenged include: Local councils Government ministers and departments Local NHS trusts School governors' boards Magistrates, cornoners and county courts Some tribunals Prison governors General guides to judicial review 2. A claim may be brought by individuals, groups or organisations. Useful guides for bringing a claim 3. Legal aid . Judicial Review reform: An attack on our legal rights? Judicial review isn't 'sexy', but it is important.
Arguably, it is the most important and effective way in our democracy of holding the government and other public authorities to account. On Monday the House of Commons will debate government plans to reform it, contained in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, which Labour's Shadow Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary Sadiq Khan has described as 'an unconstitutional attack on the rights of the British people'.
Is that hyperbole, or is this truly a constitutional issue of unique importance? Put simply judicial review is the process by which ordinary people and organisations can apply to the courts to challenge the lawfulness of decisions made by public bodies, including government. It enshrines the citizen's right to ask a judge to consider whether a public body has followed its own rules - usually those set out by Parliament or ministers. But a canter through history gives a flavour of why Judicial Review excites such strong views. Hillsborough and Judicial Review. Judicial Review of Civil Partnerships.
A couple has launched a judicial review against the Government saying that civil partnerships should be available to all couples in the UK, not just same-sex couples. Great example for Pressure Groups in Unit 1 and Judiciary in Unit 2. As it stands in the UK, a heterosexual couple can only get married, be it in a church or as a more secular affair at at registry office. A same-sex couple however, after the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 can choose civil partnerships or a marriage. The couple in this article are arguing that this is unfair and they too should be able to have a civil partnership. The case itself is a great example of judicial reviw against the government – we will have to await the outcome to see who wins.
Like this: Like Loading... Bedroom Tax – Govt defeated by Court of Appeal. This week, the Government’s attempts to tax people who live in social housing but have spare bedrooms faced a challenge in the Court of Appeal. The Court ruled that this new law discriminated against victims of domestic abuse and the disabled. This is a great example for the Judiciary, Parliament and PM & Cabinet topics in Unit 2 and Democracy in Unit 1.
Firstly, it demonstrates the role of the judiciary in the UK, and more specifically this article looks at this case of ‘JUDICIAL REVIEW’: “Today’s judgement is another example of the power of judicial review. The victories for the two families at the heart of these cases show once again that there is virtually no area of government decision making that cannot be scrutinised by the independent judiciary. It is also useful in an essay about Parliament, PM& Cabinet (both Unit 2) or Democracy (Unit 1). Like this: Like Loading... Judicial Review of the UK Drone Strikes | lgspolitics. Judicial Review remains one of the most challenging concepts that students seem to find at AS level.
At it’s heart, it is the idea that the actions of the government are reviewed by a neutral and independent body who can look at whether the government acted beyond it’s power (ultra vires). In the UK, this process is hampered by the fact that Parliament remains sovereign and therefore even if the judiciary does rule against the government, the ruling is not binding on the government. In this example, the judiciary has been asked to review the lawfulness of the recently announced drone strikes which killed two UK citizens in Syria: “MP Caroline Lucas and Baroness Jones have now sought a judicial review of the policy, claiming that “targeted killing” is unlawful.”
While this process has no outcome yet, it is a useful example of the kind of actions that can be judicially reviewed. Like this: Like Loading...