UK Law and Practice Contributed by: Charles Brasted, Julia Marlow, Andrew Eaton and Fraser Eccles, Hogan Lovells International LLP
not addressed in the claim form is raised in the acknowledgement of service (CPR 54.8A and PD54A, paragraph 7.1). 9.6 Initial Sifting Process Judicial review is a two-stage process. First, the claimant must obtain permission from the court to apply for judicial review. If permission is granted, the claim will proceed to a substantive hearing of the claim (or of the grounds for which permission is granted). The purpose of the per - mission stage is to prevent unmeritorious claims from hampering government action and wasting court time. The court will therefore refuse per - mission to apply for judicial review unless it is satisfied that there is an “arguable ground for judicial review that has a realistic prospect of success” (Simone v Chancellor of the Exchequer [2019] EWHC 2609 (Admin)). Even where the claim is arguable, the court must still refuse permission if: • the claimant lacks standing (see 6.1 Require- ments for Administrative Law Challenges ); and/or • it appears to be highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been sub - stantially different if the conduct complained of had not occurred (Section 31(3C)–(3F) SCA 1981). This is often referred to as the “no substantial difference” test. Other reasons why the court may still refuse per - mission include because: • the claimant has an adequate alternative rem - edy (see 9.2 Exhausting Internal Appeals ); and/or • the claim has been filed out of time or with undue delay (see 9.3 Time Limits ).
In most cases, permission will initially be consid - ered “on the papers” . If permission is granted, the claim will proceed, and the court will usu - ally give directions for the next stages of pro - ceedings. If permission is refused (or refused in part), the court will record brief reasons, and the claimant can request that the application be reconsidered at an oral hearing. However, if the court decides on the papers that an application is “totally without merit” , then the claimant will have no right to a renewed oral hearing (but may appeal (see 15. Appeals )). The court may, in exceptional circumstances, order that the application for permission be heard together with the substantive merits of There is a separate process for expedited judicial review proceedings set out in PD54B. However, these procedures are available only for cases where there is a genuine need for the application to be considered urgently, as opposed to cir - cumstances where the claimant’s interests might be better served by an application for interim relief. If there is an urgent need for an application to be considered within seven days of being filed, the claim should be filed using “Form N463 – Judicial Review: Application for urgent consid- eration” , which must include: • an explanation of why expedition is neces - sary; • a statement of the position of the defendant and any interested party on the expedition sought (or, if that position is not known, an the claim at “rolled-up” hearing. 9.7 Expedited Proceedings explanation of the steps taken to contact those parties to ascertain that position); and
220 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook