‘A High Court judge has dismissed a claim for judicial review in a case where legal aid for a Home Office asylum interview was refused because the interviewee had turned 18 by the time of his interview.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 23rd August 2024
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A law student has won a partial victory in a judicial review challenging the recommendations of the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), an independent body which reviews student complaints about universities.’
Legal Futures, 20th August 2024
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Leon Glenister reports on a successful defence to a judicial review challenging the established interpretation of teaching regulation legislation.’
Local Government Lawyer, 19th August 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Hackney Council is facing a High Court challenge by campaigners battling to save two children’s centres from closure.’
BBC News, 18th August 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘ZRR, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Bexley (2024) EWHC 2073 (Admin). This was a judicial review of Bexley’s contention that temporary accommodation offered to ZRR under s.190 Housing Act 1996 was suitable and its duty was discharged when ZRR refused that accommodation.’
Nearly Legal, 11th August 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘UO v London Borough of Redbridge (2024) EWHC 1989 (Admin). We first saw UO and Redbridge in this judicial review of an unlawful housing needs assessment (HNA) and suitability decision. That decision was, to say the least, scathing about Redbridge’s decision making. So it is perhaps a surprise to see a further judicial review of Redbridge’s further HNA(s) and a suitability decision as to out of borough accommodation, not least because this judicial review decision includes judicial comment on Redbridge failing to take account of the evidence and findings in the previous JR. But that is what this is.’
Nearly Legal, 4th August 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘This article is the first to demonstrate how the United Nations Universal Periodic Review (UPR) recommendations can be used in UK domestic law and courts. The UPR is a cyclical review of UN member states’ human rights obligations. It is unique because it involves states (rather than judges or experts) scrutinising and making recommendations to one another on how they can improve human rights on the ground. These recommendations are then subject to a process of follow-up in the subsequent review, which will occur four to five years later when the state can then be scrutinised about their implementation of recommendations made in the previous cycle. The UPR was set up as an international political process, and as a consequence legal practitioners may be unaware of the UPR, or at least unfamiliar with its relevance to their work. Indeed, it has almost never featured in reported case law in England and Wales.’
Judicial Review, 29th July 2024
Source: www.tandfonline.com
‘A ban on prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender dysphoria in England, Scotland and Wales was lawful, a high court judge has ruled.’
The Guardian, 29th July 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The London Borough of Islington has lost a judicial review claim against a decision by the Secretary of State for Education to refuse to revoke an Academy Order for a school the council considered should close.’
Local Government Lawyer, 22nd July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In its recent judgment in World Uyghur Congress v National Crime Agency, the Court of Appeal addressed the application of the money laundering provisions of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) in the context of international supply chains. The appeal court’s clarification of the scope of the ‘adequate consideration’ exemption under POCA has wide-reaching implications not only for businesses with global supply chains but for all professional services firms in the UK.’
Law Society's Gazette, 19th July 2024
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Joshua Swirsky discusses a case where Upper Tribunal Judge Smith once again had to consider the balance of convenience in an age assessment case when interim relief is sought.’
Local Government Lawyer, 12th July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘It is not that often that first instance judges in judicial review claims disagree as to the approach to be taken in the context of a core question relating to judicial review. When it happens, administrative lawyers are bound to take notice. This has most recently occurred in the context of rationality challenges to decisions taken by the Secretary of State for Justice to reject Parole Board recommendations to release or transfer to open conditions. The most interesting aspect of this recent phenomenon is that the High Court has managed to hand down, on our count, 13 reported decisions over the last two years, before the Court of Appeal has had the opportunity to “resolve” the issue, although a hearing is currently listed before the Court of Appeal in appeals against two of these decisions in October 2024. In this piece, we seek to explain the current position, highlighting areas of agreement and disagreement between first instance judges, and which questions remain, as yet, unresolved.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 11th July 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘In this post, 4 New Square Chambers’ Alex Forzani explores the Supreme Court’s decision in R (Finch) v Surrey County Council [2024] UKSC 20 and analyses its implications on the scope of environmental impact assessments. The judgment is likely to have significant implications on the development of, and investment in, new projects in the UK.’
4 New Square, 2nd July 2024
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘A residents’ group has launched a judicial review challenge against Manchester City Council after its planning committee granted planning permission for a student block it had previously refused permission for on four occasions.’
Local Government Lawyer, 8th July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A judicial review claim has been launched against Bristol City Council, challenging its decision to enter into a “safety valve agreement” with the Department for Education.’
Local Government Lawyer, 1st July 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In 2023, the York Disability Rights Forum announced their intention to bring judicial review proceedings against the Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board on the basis that its adult autism and ADHD assessment pilot pathway was unlawful. The pilot had been introduced in March 2023 in response to increasing numbers of adults seeking an assessment, a growing waiting list, and an existing system which could not keep up. Effectively, the pilot introduced narrowed eligibility criteria so that only adults who were considered ‘at-risk’ were added to the waiting list for an assessment. All other adults could be placed on another waiting list with no end date, and no guarantee of an assessment. The York Disability Rights Forum says that this pilot restricts the rights of neurodivergent people from gaining diagnosis, and may violate the right to family and private life protected under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.’
Essex CAJI, 2nd July 2024
Source: essexcaji.org
‘Readers with long memories may recall that when Felix Ngole was a second-year Master’s student on a social work course at Sheffield University, he was excluded from the course by the Faculty of Social Sciences Fitness to Practise Committee after comments he had posted on Facebook about his personal opposition to same-sex marriage. He sought judicial review of that decision, and though the Administrative Court found for the University, in R (Ngole) v The University of Sheffield [2019] EWCA Civ 1127 the Court of Appeal allowed his appeal and remitted his case for reconsideration. We noted the appeal here.’
Law & Religion UK, 2nd July 2024
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
‘On 5 June 2024, the Administrative Court gave its final word on relief in the (relatively) long running ECPAT UK judicial review (see R (ECPAT UK) v Kent County Council [2024] EWHC 1353 (Admin)). The case centred on Kent County Council’s (“KCC”) failure to meet its statutory duty to look after unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (“UAS children”) arriving at its coast and the Home Secretary’s systematic, routine and (ultimately) unlawful use of hotels to accommodate them outside of the care system. While the Court’s findings of illegality on the part of both defendants were uncontroversial – indeed KCC conceded it was acting (owing to a purported lack of resource) illegally (see R (ECPAT UK) v Kent CC, SSHD [2023] EWHC 1953 (Admin), para 161) – it was the Court’s willingness to extend its usual role and monitor the defendants’ compliance with its ruling which makes this case unique.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 1st July 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The High Court has granted the Good Law Project permission to challenge the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s decision to exclude onshore wind from its policy on energy infrastructure.’
Local Government Lawyer, 25th June 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘AK, R (On the Application Of) v Westminster City Council (2024) EWHC 769 (Admin). This was a judicial review of Westminster’s Allocation policy as it applied to ‘reciprocal transfers’ between another borough and Westminster.’
Nearly Legal, 23rd June 2024
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024