Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

435998

registered interest
date	02/12/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans he has to reform judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Edmonton
tabling member printed	Kate Osamor
uin	902611
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/12/2015 answer text <p>The government has always been clear that judicial review, when used properly, is a crucial component of the rule of law.</p><p>But too often the system is open to abuse. That is why we have taken forward reform, such as the creation of the Planning Court, which we have implemented with the assistance of the judiciary, and the changes in the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, which we are implementing. The reforms will speed up the process for people who have arguable grounds and a genuine case to put.</p> answering member constituency Esher and Walton answering member printed Dominic Raab question first answered 08/12/2015 16:47:10 answering member 4007 label Biography information for Dominic Raab
tabling member	4515 label Biography information for Kate Osamor

177246

registered interest
date	28/01/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the Government is taking to uphold the constitutional importance of judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Middlesbrough
tabling member printed	Andy McDonald
uin	907383
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/02/2015 answer text <p /> <p>The Government’s reforms to judicial review provide a more balanced and practicable approach that will ensure cases with merit can proceed quickly through to resolution and unmeritorious claims which abuse the system and cause unnecessary delays are filtered out at the earliest opportunity.</p><p> </p><p>There is nothing in the reform package which undermines the constitutional role of judicial review as a vital check on the State.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous question first answered 03/02/2015 17:33:17 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	4269 label Biography information for Andy McDonald

172602

registered interest
date	07/01/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what amount his Department has spent on legal fees in judicial review cases in which it was found to have acted unlawfully since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	220082
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/01/2015 answer text <p>The Department does not keep a central record of the legal spend and the outcome in every judicial review brought against it or its associated bodies.</p><p> </p><p>To bring together the information sought would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 12/01/2015 17:46:03 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

169008

registered interest
date	09/12/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the contribution of the Secretary of State for Justice on 1 December 2014, Official Report, column 73, on how many occasions in the last two years each government department has been threatened with judicial review; and in each such case, whether judicial review proceedings were subsequently (a) launched and (b) successful.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	217847
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/12/2014 answer text <p>This information is not available. A ‘threat’ of judicial review could range for example from a pre-action letter sent to a central government department to an oral suggestion made at a stakeholder meeting.</p><p> </p><p>It is crucial that judicial review continues to hold public authorities to account for the right reasons. The Government’s reforms strike a fair and sensible balance between limiting the potential for the abuse of judicial review and protecting its vital role as a check on public authorities.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 15/12/2014 15:27:53 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

169009

registered interest
date	09/12/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the contribution of the Secretary of State for Justice on 1 December 2014, Official Report, column 72, what the evidential basis was for his statement that minor technicalities in process have been used as an excuse to bring judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	217848
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/01/2015 answer text <p>The Government accepts that failures of procedure can amount to substantive unlawfulness, and that judicial review is a crucial mechanism by which such unlawfulness is considered and remedied by the court.</p><p> </p><p>However, we are concerned by the continuing potential for a judicial review to be brought on minor technical points which could not have, or which were highly unlikely to have, substantially affected the outcome for the applicant.</p><p> </p><p>The potential for this type of challenge has been recognised by the courts, which have developed an approach in case law under which, if the outcome would inevitably have been the same even if the alleged defect had not occurred, the court can refuse the remedy sought – see, for example, <em>R v The Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police, ex parte Cotton</em> [1990] IRLR 344.</p><p> </p><p>However, in the Government’s view the ‘inevitable’ threshold is too high to deal effectively with claims brought on minor technical points. Consequently, in clause 64 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill (as introduced into the House of Lords), the Government is legislating to provide for a ‘highly likely’ threshold.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 19/01/2015 16:59:01 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

169010

registered interest
date	09/12/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the contribution of the Secretary of State for Justice on 1 December 2014, Official Report, column 71, what assessment he has made of when and how the system of judicial review ceased to be based on common sense.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	217849
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/12/2014 answer text <p>The Government has always been clear that judicial review, when used properly, can be a crucial component of the rule of law.</p><p> </p><p>But in the Government’s view, too often the system is open to abuse, and the common sense reforms, which, following two consultations, the Government has implemented and is seeking to implement, are needed to rebalance the system of judicial review.</p><p> </p><p>In the Government’s view, for example, the creation of a Planning Court, with the assistance of the judiciary, to speed up the consideration of challenges to key projects, is a common sense reform. That reform is now delivering significant improvements. The available evidence suggests planning judicial reviews are now significantly quicker as a result of the reforms which followed the first consultation and the introduction of the Planning Court in April 2014, which followed the second consultation. For those which reach a substantive hearing (i.e. excluding those refused permission or otherwise determined earlier in the process) the average time fell by around 30% from 54 weeks in the 12 months to April 2013 to 39 weeks in the 12 months to September 2014. This is a substantial improvement in advance of the rest of the reforms taking effect.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 17/12/2014 14:02:29 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

168350

registered interest
date	05/12/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to his contribution of 1 December 2014, Official Report, column 72, on the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, what estimate he has made of the number of applications for judicial review which were granted on minor technicalities since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	217565
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/02/2015 answer text <p>The Government has not made an estimate of the number of applications for judicial review which are granted on procedural defects or minor technicalities. Judicial review applications are not recorded in an accessible and reliable electronic form, but rather in paper case files which would need to be manually searched and as such there is no central figure. However, those involved in judicial reviews, including government departments, local authorities and businesses, are fully aware of the ways in which the judicial review process can be misused.</p><p>One of the reforms we are taking forward in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill (clause 84 of the print of the Bill currently awaiting Royal Assent) is to improve the way the courts deal with judicial reviews based on procedural defects. This is an important part of the Government’s programme to tackle public burdens, promote growth and stimulate economic recovery.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 10/02/2015 17:40:55 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

100225

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in how many judicial review cases his Department has unsuccessfully intervened since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	211304
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/10/2014 answer text <p>The purpose of an intervention in a judicial review should be to help the court decide the case.</p><p>Details of interventions made by this department since 2010 are not held centrally.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Bermondsey and Old Southwark answering member printed Simon Hughes question first answered 24/10/2014 13:43:52 answering member 194 label Biography information for Simon Hughes
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

100229

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many judicial review cases have been successfully brought against his Department in each year since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	211301
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/10/2014 answer text <p>It has not been possible to access this information within the time limit but I will provide an answer in due course.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 24/10/2014 11:58:57 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

58436

registered interest
date	05/06/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the new judicial review regulations on people who are fighting eviction or the repossession of a house.
tabling member constituency	Bolton North East
tabling member printed	Mr David Crausby
uin	199208
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/06/2014 answer text <p>Judicial review is an important way of challenging decisions by public authorities and will remain so. The recently amended regulations do not prevent people receiving legal aid in judicial review cases.</p><p> </p><p>The Government's policy is that limited legal aid resources should be targeted at those judicial review cases where they are needed most, if the legal aid system is to command public confidence and credibility. We amended the Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 to implement the proposal that legal aid providers should only be paid for work carried out on an application for permission if permission is given by the court, subject to a discretion to pay providers for work carried out on an application for permission in cases that conclude prior to a permission decision. The discretion is held by the Lord Chancellor but will be exercised by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) on behalf of the Lord Chancellor. The amendments took effect on 22 April 2014.</p><p> </p><p>An assessment of the impacts of this policy was published alongside the consultation response paper <em>Judicial Review: Proposals for Further Reform: the Government Response</em> and is available at <a title="blocked::https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review" href="https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review" target="_blank">https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review</a>. It is important to reiterate that no change has been made to the availability of civil legal aid to individuals or to eligibility for legal aid for judicial review proceedings. Where a client is in receipt of legal aid, he or she will remain so for the life of the case (unless it is withdrawn for other reasons). We consider that there will remain sufficient providers who undertake judicial review work, taking on cases which they consider to be of merit.</p><p> </p><p>The Government plans to undertake a post-implementation review of the legal aid provisions within the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 within 3-5 years of implementation. The review will include an assessment of the impact of this change.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 12/06/2014 15:50:47 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	437 label Biography information for Sir David Crausby