UK Law and Practice Contributed by: Charles Brasted, Julia Marlow, Andrew Eaton and Fraser Eccles, Hogan Lovells International LLP
not determinative. Therefore, a person or body that performs commercial or non-governmental activities may be susceptible to judicial review in respect of any of their decisions or actions that are of a sufficiently public nature. For example, see Elliott v London Metal Exchange and LME Clear[2024] EWCA Civ 1168. 5. Ouster 5.1 Legislative or Contractual Limits on Judicial Review The availability of judicial review is a key protec - tion of the rule of law in the UK constitution and so the courts generally decline to give full effect to attempts to oust the jurisdiction of courts to review the lawfulness of government decisions, except by clear and explicit words in primary leg - islation. This is due to the strong “common law presumption against ouster” and the view that independent judicial interpretation and media - tion of legislation made by Parliament is “neces- sary corollary of the sovereignty of Parliament” (R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22). It is not possible to “contract out” of susceptibility to judicial review. 6. Standing 6.1 Requirements for Administrative Law Challenges Section 31(3) SCA 1981 provides that, to bring an application for judicial review, a party must have “sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates” . The courts have given a broad interpretation to what constitutes “suf- ficient” interest, due to the public interest that the legality of government action be scrutinised and enforced.
Claimants are not required to be directly affected by the decision under challenge: an individual with no private interest who has raised an issue of public importance that would otherwise not be raised may have standing. However, a claimant may be denied standing to bring a judicial review claim where a co-claimant is better placed (R (Good Law Project) v The Prime Minister [2022] EWHC 298 (Admin)). Where the standing of the claimant is in issue, the courts will generally take the strength and importance of the grounds of challenge into account; if a claim has merit, the courts are high - ly unlikely to prevent it from proceeding solely for the claimant’s lack of standing. A distinct test for standing, known as the “victim” test, applies where the claimant seeks to raise incompatibility with human rights as a ground for judicial review (see 10.8 Human Rights ). 6.2 Charities and NGOs Charities and NGOs can bring challenges to government decisions where they themselves are not directly affected. While the courts often grant them permission to do so, the courts have held that “[n]o individual, even with a sincere interest in public law issues, would be regarded as having standing in all cases” (R (Good Law Project) v The Prime Minister [2022] EWHC 298 (Admin)).
7. Other Parties 7.1 Joinder
Parties other than the claimant and defendant in a judicial review can join the proceedings as an interested party or as an intervener.
215 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook