The Government has announced plans to review the judicial review process after the Prime Minister said it had become ‘a massive growth industry in Britain today’ and was holding up much-needed national infrastructure.
The Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling, also argued that the process had ‘expanded far beyond what was originally intended’.
In a written ministerial statement, the Lord Chancellor said the options under consideration would include:
- shortening time limits in certain cases
- restricting the opportunities for an oral reconsideration of the application for permission in certain circumstances
- introducing new fees.
He said: ‘The purpose of this is not to deny or restrict access to justice, but to provide for a more balanced and practicable approach, ensuring that weak, frivolous and unmeritorious cases are identified early, and that legitimate claims are brought quickly and efficiently to a resolution.’
The Lord Chancellor acknowledged that judicial review was a critical means of holding the executive to account and ensuring that decisions were lawful.
But he highlighted how in 1975 there were 160 applications for judicial review. In 1998 there were 4,500 applications and last year there were around 11,000.
The Lord Chancellor attributed much of the growth in judicial review applications to immigration and asylum cases, but said it was also being used as a means of challenging other types of decisions such as planning decisions, large infrastructure projects and procurement exercises.
He said: ‘The Government is concerned about the burdens that this growth has placed on stretched public services. This can lead to unnecessary costs and lengthy delays, and may in some cases stifle innovation and frustrate much needed reforms, including those aimed at stimulating growth and promoting economic recovery.’
Speaking at a CBI conference the Prime Minister described judicial review as ‘a massive growth industry’.
He added: ‘Here’s what we’re going to do. Reduce the time limit when people can bring cases. Charge more for reviews so people think twice about time-wasting. And instead of giving hopeless cases up to four bites of the cherry to appeal a decision, we will halve that to two.’
He also said the Government would review the amount of time taken on consultations and the application of European Union regulations.
As reported by Planningblog:
‘Reaction has been coming in thick and fast. Among the first to issue a comment was the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), keen to clarify the situation regarding judicial reviews of planning decisions and planning appeals following a story in the Daily Telegraph headlined ‘End of the right to challenge planning rulings’.
A DCLG spokesman said: ’This story is misleading. We are not changing local residents’ rights to object to a planning application, nor are we changing the planning appeal process. There are a limited number of judicial reviews about planning decisions each year, and they generally relate to errors in law or failure to follow due process.’
….Planning solicitor Martin Goodall examines the judicial review (JR) statistics claim by Cameron is some detail on his blog. He says that ‘Cameron’s assertion is grossly misleading’ and the JR system is not a ‘growth industry’, as the PM says. He says the overall increase in JR applications ‘has been solely attributable to immigration/asylum cases’ – which are more than three-quarters of all JR applications.
For a detailed critique of the PM’s speech at the CBI see: LINK
For Martin Goodall’s Planning law blog see: LINK
Search Planning Portal: LINK
