‘Some local authorities refer to the threat of prison in their first letter to people who have missed a council tax payment, a debt charity has said.’
BBC News, 23rd March 2026
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘According to Civil Procedure Rule 54.1, a claim for judicial review is a claim to review the lawfulness of an enactment or a decision, action or failure to act in relation to the exercise of a public function. But as the Supreme Court made clear on 16 October 2024 in Re an application by Noeleen McAleenon for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2024] UKSC 31 (at paragraph 50): ‘The forms of relief available in a claim for judicial review are discretionary…’ Moreover: ‘A court may refuse to grant leave to apply for judicial review or refuse a remedy at the substantive hearing if a suitable alternative remedy exists but the claimant has failed to use it.’ For: ‘As stated in R (Glencore Energy UK Ltd) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2017] EWCA Civ 1716…“judicial review in the High Court is ordinarily a remedy of last resort, to ensure that the rule of law is respected where no other procedure is suitable to achieve that objective”.’ So if: ‘…other means of redress are conveniently and effectively available, they ought ordinarily to be used before resort to judicial review’. ‘
Law Society's Gazette, 20th March 2026
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Divisional Court (Lewis LJ, Chamberlain J) sitting in Cardiff has held that recognising a common law duty on Welsh ministers to consult before introducing legislation in the Senedd would infringe the constitutional separation of powers reflected in the Government of Wales Act 2006 (“GoWA”). The Court’s decision represents a muscular invocation of the pre-legislative, holistic view of devolution provided by Lord Hope in Axa. But that is no reason to think the textualist view of devolution provided by Lord Reed in that case has been departed from. The case is R (The Greyhound Board of Great Britain) v The Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin).’
Administrative Court Blog, 22nd March 2026
‘The current government has placed much emphasis on the perceived delays and chilling effects to the delivery of major infrastructure projects as a result of judicial review challenges by project opponents (framed as so-called ‘NIMBYs’ or ‘blockers’), and has introduced some reforms targeted at minimising the impacts of these challenges following an independent review commissioned by the previous Sunak government. Among the issues raised in that independent review was the time taken for infrastructure challenges to proceed through the courts.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 23rd March 2026
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2026