What exactly is a ‘Judicial Review’?
The answer is quite straightforward. When an illegal, unfair and/or irrational decision has been made by a public body, for example, the Home Office, a Board of Trustees, the Environment Agency etc; a Judicial Review is a legal challenge to the said decision.
This process allows either businesses, other public bodies, groups or even individuals to legally challenge the validity and legitimate nature of decisions made by Local Authorities, Government Departments, Ministers and various other public bodies.
What are the grounds for a Judicial Review?
Varying from case to case, certain specific grounds can differ, however there are three main grounds of Judicial Review that are focal to all cases. These are when the decision maker has acted:
- Illegally/Unlawfully – has no powers to make the decision, has acted outside the boundaries of its statutory powers or has misapplied the law
- Unfairly/Procedurally Improper – has not followed the set procedures prescribed in law or has acted unfairly
- Irrationally/Disproportionately – has acted unreasonably in the circumstances or has not acted proportionately to the legitimate aim of the State.
It is important to emphasise that the latter ground of Proportionality has arisen as a result of the Human Rights Act 1998 whereby it is unlawful for any public body to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right, for example, a right to respect for private life and/or family life.
Having brought a significant number of Judicial Reviews from varying backgrounds such as assorted business and corporate arenas, to cases within the health and social care sector and cases involving human rights, at Aston Brooke we aim to bring you successful results to your case. Back in December 2010 Aston Brooke won a momentous judgment against the Secretary of State for the Home Department’s decision to impose interim limits and “caps” on Tier 2 (General) migrants. The High Court subsequently ruled in favoured of the Claimants and announced that these interim limits and “caps” imposed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department were unlawful.