Judicial review is about legality, not simply disagreement
The Administrative Court does not ordinarily remake a public body's decision merely because another outcome might have been preferable. The challenge is directed to the lawfulness of the decision-making process or the legal basis of the act or omission.
Time is often the first legal issue.
A judicial review claim must generally be brought promptly and, in ordinary cases, no later than three months after the grounds arose. Some categories have shorter statutory time limits. Pre-action correspondence does not automatically stop time running.
Potential public-law grounds
Illegality
The decision-maker may have misunderstood the law, exceeded a statutory power, applied the wrong test or taken account of legally irrelevant considerations.
Procedural unfairness
A person may not have been given the process required by statute, policy, legitimate expectation or common-law fairness.
Irrationality
In an appropriate case, a decision may be challenged as legally irrational or unreasonable, applying the relevant public-law standard.
Human-rights and equality issues
Some public decisions engage Convention rights, equality duties or other statutory protections alongside ordinary judicial-review grounds.
The pre-action stage
The Judicial Review Pre-Action Protocol usually requires a focused letter identifying the decision challenged, facts, legal grounds, information or documents sought and proposed remedy. Urgent cases may require a different approach, and delay should not be created merely to complete pre-action correspondence.
Permission
A claimant normally requires the court's permission to proceed with judicial review. The claim must identify an arguable public-law basis with a realistic prospect of success and overcome any standing, alternative-remedy, delay or procedural issue.
Alternative remedies
Judicial review is generally a remedy of last resort. If a statutory appeal, internal review, tribunal route or other effective remedy exists, the court may expect that route to be used first unless there is a proper reason not to do so.
Urgent interim relief
Where a decision is about to take effect and would cause irreversible prejudice, the court can in an appropriate case be asked for interim relief. The evidence must explain the urgency, legal basis and practical consequences clearly.
Possible remedies
Depending on the case, remedies can include quashing, prohibiting or mandatory orders, declarations and injunctions. A successful challenge commonly results in the decision being set aside and reconsidered lawfully rather than the court substituting the claimant's preferred decision.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have three months to send a pre-action letter?
No. The requirement is generally to act promptly, and the three-month period is usually an outer limit rather than a target. Some claims have shorter limits.
Can judicial review challenge a private company?
Usually judicial review concerns public functions and public-law decisions. Whether a particular body or function is amenable to review can itself be a legal issue.
Can the court award damages?
Damages are not ordinarily a standalone judicial-review remedy. They may be available where a separate legal basis exists and the procedural requirements are met.
What should I send you?
Send the decision or failure complained of, the date it occurred, all review or appeal information, relevant correspondence and a concise explanation of the legal or procedural problem.