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 question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1379858

registered interest
date	18/11/2021
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 progress he has made in reforming the law of judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Hendon
tabling member printed	Dr Matthew Offord
uin	77416
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2021 answer text <p>The Judicial Review and Courts Bill delivers on the Government’s manifesto commitment to ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.</p><p> </p><p>The Bill creates new powers for the courts to modify quashing orders in Judicial Review proceedings and improves the flexibility of the courts to provide proportionate remedies, increasing the tools in their toolbox.</p><p> </p><p>Specifically, the power to suspend a quashing order allows the courts to give time for transitional arrangements to be made, or give Parliament the opportunity to pass legislation in response to a decision to quash.</p><p> </p><p>The Bill also allows for the retrospective effect of quashing orders to be removed or limited. This measure allows the court to protect third parties that have relied on decisions in the past, and whose legal position may be compromised if that decision is quashed retrospectively.</p><p> </p><p>Finally, the Bill removes <em>Cart</em> judicial reviews, by way of a narrow and carefully worded ouster clause. We want to remove <em>Cart </em>reviews because the situation is, in the Government’s firm view, a disproportionate use of resources in our justice system. Out of around 750 applications a year only 3.4% are successful, and these cases take up around 180 days of precious judicial resource a year.</p><p> </p><p>The Bill finished its Commons Committee stage on 23 November.</p> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 26/11/2021 14:58:10 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge
tabling member	4006 label Biography information for Dr Matthew Offord

1378934

registered interest
date	16/11/2021
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many judicial review proceedings there are in respect of her Department; and if she will provide a breakdown of the number of judicial reviews being heard in (a) England and Wales's Upper Tribunal, (b) Scotland's Outer House of the Court of Session and (c) Northern Ireland's High Court.
tabling member constituency	North Down
tabling member printed	Stephen Farry
uin	76046
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/11/2021 answer text <p>The total number of cases as a breakdown of cases in different courts is not held centrally for England and Wales</p><p>In relation to Scotland there are 95 active Home Office judicial review cases in the Outer House of the Court of Session.</p><p>In relation to Northern Ireland there are 46 active Home Office judicial review cases.</p> answering member constituency North West Hampshire answering member printed Kit Malthouse question first answered 24/11/2021 17:23:24 answering member 4495 label Biography information for Kit Malthouse
tabling member	4856 label Biography information for Stephen Farry

1330290

registered interest
date	07/06/2021
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	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to reform judicial review.
tabling member printed	Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick
uin	HL793
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/06/2021 answer text <p>The Independent Review of Administrative Law made recommendations for reform and the Government consulted on these and other proposals. We are considering the responses to the consultation before deciding on the measures to take forward but the Government will introduce legislation in the current session.</p> answering member printed Lord Wolfson of Tredegar question first answered 21/06/2021 15:41:24 answering member 4901 label Biography information for Lord Wolfson of Tredegar
tabling member	4130 label Biography information for Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick

1259654

registered interest
date	09/12/2020
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, with reference to any published criteria or guidance including, but not limited to, the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2020 and Practice Direction 54E (Planning Court Claims), what the process is for the allocation of cases identified as Aarhus Convention claims in Form N461 to judges in the Planning and Administrative Courts; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Bristol East
tabling member printed	Kerry McCarthy
uin	127495
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/12/2020 answer text <p>Judges dealing with Planning Court cases are authorised to do so by the President of the Queen’s Bench Division, based on their experience and expertise in dealing with such matters. Cases requiring planning expertise are allocated to an available Planning Court Judge.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 18/12/2020 14:00:17 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	1491 label Biography information for Kerry McCarthy

1183079

registered interest
date	05/03/2020
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, with reference to the oral contribution of the Attorney General of 16 January 2020, Official Report, columns 1143-1144, what plans he has for a review into the judicial review process; who will lead that review; what his timetable is for that review; whether that review will be conducted as part of the Constitution, Democracy and Human Rights Commission; and how he plans to consult (a) Members and (b) the public.
tabling member constituency	Brighton, Pavilion
tabling member printed	Caroline Lucas
uin	25645
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/03/2020 answer text <p>As set out in our manifesto, the Government will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.</p><p> </p><p>Discussions on how to meet this commitment are continuing within Government and further details will be announced in due course.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 12/03/2020 14:05:25 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	3930 label Biography information for Caroline Lucas

1180656

registered interest
date	25/02/2020
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	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many judicial reviews were conducted in England and Wales in each year from 1990 to 2019.
tabling member printed	Lord Patten
uin	HL1884
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/03/2020 answer text <p>The table sets out the number of judicial reviews that were conducted in the High Court (Administrative Court) of England and Wales each year between 1999- Q3 2019. These are substantive hearings, and not applications for permission to apply for judicial review. They include all outcomes, including the substantive decision of ‘withdraw’. Unfortunately, statistics from before this time were unobtainable in the time available. Data for Q4 2019 is due to be published on 5th March 2020.</p><p>The table also includes the number of judicial review disposals in the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum) Chamber from 2013 (when cases started to be heard there) and until Q3 2019. Importantly, this statistic includes all applications for permission to apply for judicial review, and not just the substantive hearings in stark contrast to the above number quoted for the Administrative Court, which only accounts for substantive hearings. The figures cannot be broken down into hearings conducted in the time available.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Judicial review in the High Court (Administrative Court)</p></td><td><p>Judicial reviews in the UTIAC (Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Substantive cases heard</p></td><td><p>Disposals (inc.applications rejected)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>1999</p></td><td><p>1,117</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2000</p></td><td><p>1,207</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2001</p></td><td><p>729</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2002</p></td><td><p>420</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2003</p></td><td><p>420</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2004</p></td><td><p>334</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2005</p></td><td><p>392</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2006</p></td><td><p>461</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2007</p></td><td><p>421</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008</p></td><td><p>419</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p></td><td><p>488</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>477</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>485</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>541</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>546</p></td><td><p>329</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>392</p></td><td><p>12,708</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>374</p></td><td><p>18,788</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>331</p></td><td><p>15,012</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>315</p></td><td><p>11,488</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2018</p></td><td><p>219</p></td><td><p>9,971</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2019 Q1-Q3</p></td><td><p>57</p></td><td><p>6,529</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>TOTAL</p></td><td><p>10,145</p></td><td><p>74,825</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Keen of Elie question first answered 10/03/2020 17:47:57 answering member 4538 label Biography information for Lord Keen of Elie
tabling member	1137 label Biography information for Lord Patten

1122776

registered interest
date	24/04/2019
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 the average timescale is for the conclusion of a judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Bethnal Green and Bow
tabling member printed	Rushanara Ali
uin	247071
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/05/2019 answer text <p>From January to December 2018 the average clearance time for a Judicial Review in the Administrative Court, from lodgement to a final hearing decision was 167 days. The published data is available at the following link: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/civil-justice-statistics-october-to-december-2018" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/civil-justice-statistics-october-to-december-2018</a></p> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 02/05/2019 15:55:20 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
tabling member	4138 label Biography information for Rushanara Ali

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

100080

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many judicial reviews there were involving Government departments according to records held by the (a) Treasury Solicitor and (b) Administrative Court Office in each of the last four years; and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	211271
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department holds records relating only to those cases in which it has acted. The Treasury Solicitor represents most, but not all, government departments in litigation. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. According to records held by the Treasury Solicitor, the number of judicial reviews involving government departments in which it has acted in each of the last four years is as follows:</p><p>2010 – 8,566</p><p>2011 – 9,603</p><p>2012 – 10,274</p><p>2013 – 16,449</p><p>Information relating to how many of those reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each year is not held centrally and could not be created without incurring disproportionate cost.</p><p><del class="ministerial">The Administrative Court Office does not collate the information requested centrally and determining the number of reviews and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part would incur a disproportionate cost.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The information requested in respect of the Administrative Court Office is published online at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a> . The 2013 data is not currently available.</ins></p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 28/10/2014 15:10:43 question first ministerially corrected 05/01/2015 17:35:17 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 24759 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
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