What is Judicial Review?
Judicial review is a legal process that allows individuals or organisations to challenge decisions, actions, or failures to act by public bodies or officials. It is not about whether a decision was “right” or “wrong” in someone’s opinion, but whether the decision was made fairly, lawfully, and within the powers granted to the decision-maker.
The main purpose of judicial review is to ensure that public authorities act within the law and follow proper procedures. This process checks if government bodies, local councils, regulators, or other organisations exercising public functions have acted in accordance with their legal duties. For a more detailed overview of how judicial review works and why it matters, see judicial review explained.
Who can apply for judicial review?
Anyone who is directly affected by a public body’s decision can apply for judicial review. This usually means individuals or groups who have a sufficient interest in the matter, such as people denied access to services, affected by planning decisions, or impacted by changes to public policy. In some cases, organisations or charities can also bring a claim if they represent the interests of those affected.
Judicial review is typically used in situations where:
- A public authority has made a decision that appears unlawful, unreasonable, or unfair.
- There has been a failure to follow correct procedure, such as not consulting those affected.
- Human rights may have been breached by a government action or omission.
- A public official has acted outside their legal powers.
For practical examples of judicial review in action and its role in protecting rights, you can read more at Judicial Review.
Which decisions can be challenged?
Judicial review applies to decisions made by “public bodies.” This includes central and local government, the police, NHS trusts, regulatory agencies, and sometimes private organisations carrying out public functions. To better understand who counts as a public body and what kinds of decisions can be challenged, visit Public Bodies.
Why is judicial review important?
Judicial review is a vital part of the UK’s legal system. It holds public authorities accountable and ensures they do not act beyond their powers or in ways that are unfair or discriminatory. By allowing courts to review the lawfulness of government actions, judicial review helps to protect individual rights and uphold the rule of law.
Most judicial review cases are heard in the Administrative Court, which is a specialist part of the High Court dealing with these types of claims. The court’s role is to decide whether the public body acted within the law, rather than to substitute its own decision.
If you want to learn more about the legal framework and practicalities of judicial review, including its significance in upholding fairness and accountability, see the resources linked above.
When Can You Start a Judicial Review?
Starting a judicial review is a significant legal step, and it’s important to understand when you are eligible to begin this process. Judicial review is used to challenge decisions made by public bodies or officials, but there are strict rules about when you can apply and the types of decisions that can be reviewed.
Time Limits for Starting a Judicial Review
One of the most important factors to consider is the time limit. In most cases, you must start your judicial review application promptly, and in any event within three months of the date when the decision you are challenging was made. If you miss this deadline, it is very unlikely that the court will allow your case to go ahead, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
For certain types of cases, such as those involving planning decisions, the time limit can be even shorter – sometimes as little as six weeks. It’s essential to act quickly and seek advice as soon as you become aware of a decision you wish to challenge.
If your case relates to a decision made by a local authority, there may be specific deadlines or procedures to follow. You can find more details about these in our section on local authority decision timeframes.
Why Acting Quickly Matters
Courts expect applicants to act without unnecessary delay. Waiting too long can mean you lose your right to challenge the decision, even if you are still within the three-month period. Delays can also weaken your case, as evidence may become harder to gather and the public body’s position could become more entrenched.
Does Your Case Qualify for Judicial Review?
Not all decisions can be challenged by judicial review. Generally, the process is available if:
- The decision was made by a public authority (such as a government department, local council, or regulatory body).
- The decision affects your rights or interests.
- There is no adequate alternative way to challenge the decision (such as an appeal process).
Judicial review is designed to examine the legality of a decision, rather than whether it was fair or reasonable in your opinion. The court will consider whether the public body acted within its legal powers, followed fair procedures, and respected your rights. For a more detailed explanation of the types of decisions that can be reviewed, see Judicial Review and the overview of Local Authority Decisions.
Legal Rules and Guidance
The procedures for judicial review are set out in the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Part 54. These rules explain how to start a claim, the documents you need, and the steps involved in the process.
Before applying, it’s important to check:
- The exact date of the decision you want to challenge.
- Whether you have a valid legal ground for review (such as illegality, procedural unfairness, or irrationality).
- If you have exhausted any alternative remedies, like appeals or complaints.
Practical Advice
- Act quickly: As soon as you receive or become aware of the decision, note the date and seek legal advice if possible.
- Gather evidence: Collect all relevant documents and correspondence related to the decision.
- Check for alternatives: Make sure there isn’t a specific appeal route you should use before considering judicial review.
If you are unsure whether your case qualifies, or if you are within the correct time limit, it is always advisable to seek professional legal advice as soon as possible.
For a broader understanding of how judicial review works in English law, you may also find it helpful to read Judicial review in English law – Wikipedia.
Steps to Start the Judicial Review Process
Steps to Start the Judicial Review Process
Starting a judicial review in the UK is a structured process designed to ensure that challenges to decisions made by public bodies are handled fairly and efficiently. Below, we outline each step you need to take, from preparing your claim to what happens after you file your application.
1. Check If Judicial Review Is the Right Option
Before beginning, make sure judicial review is the correct route for your challenge. Judicial review is used to question the lawfulness of decisions made by public authorities, not to appeal the merits of a decision. In some cases, there may be other ways to challenge government decisions, such as appeals or complaints procedures, which must usually be tried first.
2. Act Quickly and Note Time Limits
Judicial review claims must be brought promptly and, in most cases, no later than three months after the decision you are challenging was made. If you miss this deadline, your case may not be considered, so it’s important to act quickly.
3. Prepare Your Claim: Gathering Documents and Evidence
To prepare your claim, collect all relevant documents, correspondence, and evidence related to the decision. This may include:
- The original decision letter or notice
- Any correspondence with the public body
- Policies or guidance documents relied upon
- Notes of meetings or conversations
Clear and organised evidence will help the court understand your case and support your arguments.
4. Pre-Action Protocol: Sending a Letter Before Claim
Before you apply to the court, you are expected to send a “pre-action letter” to the public body. This letter should explain:
- The decision you are challenging
- Why you believe it is unlawful
- The outcome you are seeking
This gives the public body a chance to respond and may resolve the issue without going to court.
5. Completing the Claim Form (Application for Permission)
If the issue is not resolved, you can start court proceedings by completing the claim form (Form N461). This form is crucial – it sets out your case and asks the court for permission to proceed. You must include:
- Your details and those of the defendant (the public body)
- The decision being challenged
- The grounds for judicial review (e.g., illegality, procedural unfairness, irrationality)
- A detailed statement of facts
- A statement of the remedies you are seeking
Make sure your application is clear, focused, and complete. Inaccurate or incomplete forms can delay your case or result in it being refused.
6. Filing the Claim Form With the Court
Judicial review claims are usually filed in the High Court, specifically in the Administrative Court. You must:
- Submit the claim form, supporting documents, and the court fee
- Provide copies of all key evidence
- Follow the requirements set out in Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR), Part 54, which governs judicial review procedures
7. Serving the Claim on the Public Body
Once you have filed your claim, you must serve (officially deliver) copies of the claim form and supporting documents to the public body you are challenging. This must usually be done within seven days of filing your claim. Proper service is essential – if you do not serve the documents correctly, your claim could be dismissed.
8. What Happens Next: Permission Stage
After your claim is filed and served, the court will decide whether to grant permission for your case to proceed. This is usually done by a judge reviewing the papers, but sometimes a short hearing is held. The court will only grant permission if your case is arguable and meets the legal requirements.
If permission is refused, you may be able to request an oral hearing to argue your case in person. If permission is granted, the case moves forward to a full hearing where both sides present their arguments.
Tips for a Clear and Complete Application
- Use plain language and avoid unnecessary legal jargon
- Clearly state the decision you are challenging and the reasons why
- Organise your evidence logically and label documents
- Double-check all deadlines and procedural requirements
- Seek legal advice if you are unsure about any part of the process
For a more detailed understanding of the steps and requirements, you can consult Judicial Review for an overview of how judicial review works in English law, or refer directly to the official Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR), Part 54.
By following these steps carefully, you can give your judicial review application the best chance of being considered by the court.
Understanding Court Fees and Financial Help
When starting a judicial review, one of the key steps is understanding the court fees you may need to pay and what financial help is available if you cannot afford them.
What Are the Court Fees for Judicial Review?
To begin a judicial review in the UK, you must pay a court fee when you submit your application. The main fee is for filing the claim form. Additional fees may apply at later stages, such as for hearings or further applications. The exact amounts can change, so it’s important to check the most up-to-date information on the HM Courts & Tribunals Service website, which provides details about all current court fees and payment methods.
Getting Help With Court Fees
If you cannot afford to pay the court fees, you may be eligible for financial assistance through the government’s help with court fees scheme. This scheme – sometimes referred to as “Fee Waivers” or “Help With Fees (HWF)” – allows you to apply for a reduction or complete waiver of the court fees, depending on your circumstances.
Who Can Apply for Financial Assistance?
Eligibility for help with court fees is based on your financial situation. Generally, you may qualify if you:
- Receive certain benefits, such as Universal Credit, Income Support, or income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance.
- Have a low income and limited savings.
- Are unable to pay the fee without experiencing financial hardship.
You will need to provide evidence of your income, savings, and any benefits you receive when you apply. The application process is designed to be straightforward, but it is important to fill in all details accurately to avoid delays.
How to Apply for Help With Fees
To apply for help with court fees, you must complete the official application form and submit it, along with supporting documents, to the court. Full guidance and the necessary forms can be found through the help with court fees resource. Make sure to read the instructions carefully and include all required information, as incomplete applications may be rejected or delayed.
Where to Find Official Guidance
For detailed information about court fees, eligibility criteria, and the application process for fee help, the HM Courts & Tribunals Service provides authoritative guidance. This is the best place to check for updates to fees, forms, and rules.
If you want a broader understanding of the judicial review process, including practical steps and common challenges, the Judicial Review Procedure resource offers a comprehensive overview.
Understanding the costs involved and knowing your options for financial support can help you plan effectively before starting a judicial review. If you need further advice, consider seeking independent legal advice or exploring the resources linked above for more guidance.
What Happens After You Start a Judicial Review?
After you submit your application for judicial review, the court does not automatically proceed to a full hearing. Instead, the process begins with what is known as the permission stage. This is a crucial first step where a judge examines your case to decide whether it is arguable and should move forward.
The Permission Stage
At this stage, the court reviews your application and supporting documents to determine if your claim has a realistic prospect of success and whether there is a good reason for it to be heard. The judge may make this decision based solely on the written materials you provide, though in some cases, a short oral hearing may be allowed if permission is initially refused on paper.
Possible Outcomes at the Permission Stage
There are two main outcomes at this stage:
- Permission Granted: If the judge decides your case meets the necessary criteria, permission is granted. Your judicial review will then proceed to a full hearing, where both sides can present their arguments in detail. The court will set a timetable for the next steps, and you may be required to provide further evidence or written submissions.
- Permission Refused: If the judge concludes your case does not have sufficient merit, permission is refused. You will receive reasons for this decision, and in most cases, you have a right to request an oral renewal hearing to argue your case in person.
For more information on the rules and guidance governing this stage, you can refer to the Judicial Review and the Administrative Court for practical advice on preparing for and responding to the permission stage.
What Happens If Permission Is Granted?
Once permission is granted, your case moves to a full judicial review hearing. At this hearing, the court will consider all the evidence and legal arguments before reaching a decision. Both you (the claimant) and the public body or official you are challenging (the defendant) will have the opportunity to present your cases, usually through your legal representatives.
The court can make a range of orders if your claim succeeds, such as quashing the original decision, ordering the public body to reconsider its decision, or declaring what the law requires in your situation.
How Long Does the Process Take?
The time frame for judicial review can vary. The permission stage is often decided within a few weeks to a few months after your application is submitted. If permission is granted, the full hearing is usually scheduled several months later, depending on the court’s timetable and the complexity of the case. Throughout the process, you should be prepared for possible delays and requests for additional information.
What If Permission Is Refused?
If permission is refused, you are not necessarily at the end of the road. You may have the option to request an oral renewal hearing, as mentioned above. If this is also unsuccessful, you might be able to challenge the refusal by seeking permission to appeal to a higher court, although this is only possible in certain circumstances.
You may also want to consider other routes, such as appeals and tribunals, which can sometimes offer alternative ways to challenge decisions made by public bodies or officials. Understanding your options and the relevant procedures is important, as strict time limits often apply.
For full details on the legal framework and guidance at each stage, see the Judicial Review and the Administrative Court resources. These provide essential information about what happens after you start a judicial review and how to navigate the process effectively.
Common Reasons for Judicial Review
When considering whether to start a judicial review, it’s important to understand the main reasons – known as “grounds” – that people use to challenge decisions made by public bodies. Judicial review is not about whether a decision was “right” or “wrong” in someone’s opinion, but whether the decision was made lawfully and fairly. Here are the most common grounds for judicial review in the UK:
1. Illegality
A decision can be challenged if the public authority acted outside its legal powers, misunderstood the law, or failed to apply the law correctly. For example, if a local council refuses housing assistance to someone who is legally entitled to it, this could be considered an illegal act. The court will look at whether the authority had the legal right to make the decision in the way it did.
2. Procedural Unfairness
Procedural unfairness occurs when a public body does not follow the correct process, or fails to give someone a fair chance to present their case. This may include not consulting affected people, not giving reasons for a decision, or not following its own published procedures. For example, if you receive an NHS penalty charge and the NHS fails to consider your evidence or appeal properly, you may have grounds for a judicial review. To learn more about the appeals process, see NHS penalty appeals.
3. Irrationality
A decision is considered irrational (sometimes called “Wednesbury unreasonableness”) if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable public body would have made it. This is a high threshold, but it can apply in cases where a decision is obviously unjustifiable or arbitrary. For instance, if a council enforces a policy in a way that makes no sense or ignores critical evidence, this could be challenged as irrational.
4. Discrimination by Public Authorities
If a public authority discriminates against you on grounds such as race, gender, disability, or other protected characteristics, this may provide a basis for judicial review. Discrimination cases often overlap with breaches of the Equality Act 2010 and human rights law. For more information on your rights and the process of challenging discrimination by public authorities, visit our dedicated guide.
5. Breach of Human Rights
Judicial review is also a way to challenge decisions that violate your human rights under the Human Rights Act 1998. If you believe a public authority has acted in a way that breaches your fundamental rights – such as your right to a fair trial, privacy, or freedom of expression – you can raise this as a ground for judicial review. The resource “How to stand up to power: Judicial Review & the Human Rights Act – Liberty” provides practical insights into using judicial review to challenge unlawful actions by public bodies.
Examples in Practice
- Housing decisions: If you have been refused housing assistance and believe the council did not apply the law correctly or failed to consider your circumstances, judicial review could be an option.
- NHS penalties: If you have received an NHS penalty charge and your appeal was not properly considered, you may be able to challenge the process through NHS penalty appeals.
- Discrimination: If a public body treats you unfairly due to a protected characteristic, you can explore challenging discrimination by public authorities as a ground for judicial review.
Why Understanding the Grounds Matters
Knowing the common reasons for judicial review helps you decide if you have a strong case and prepares you for the process ahead. Courts will only allow claims that fall within these established legal grounds. Reviewing relevant case law, such as R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, can help you understand how principles of judicial review are applied in practice.
By understanding these grounds, you can better assess whether judicial review is the right course for your situation, gather the necessary evidence, and present your case effectively. For further details and practical advice, see the Judicial Review resource from Liberty.
Where to Get Help and Advice
Starting a judicial review can feel overwhelming, but you don’t have to face the process alone. Getting the right help and advice early on can make a big difference to your chances of success and help you understand your rights.
Sources of Legal Advice and Support
If you are considering a judicial review, it is important to seek specialist legal advice as soon as possible. Judicial review is a complex area of law, and strict time limits apply – usually you must apply promptly and, in any event, within three months of the decision you want to challenge. A solicitor with experience in public law can assess your case, explain your options, and guide you through the necessary steps.
There are several ways to find legal support:
- Solicitors and Law Centres: Many law firms and local law centres offer advice on public law and judicial review. Some may offer a free initial consultation.
- Charities and Advice Organisations: Organisations such as Citizens Advice can provide practical information and help you understand whether you have grounds for judicial review. Their guidance on Judicial Review covers who can take action, time limits, possible remedies, and what to expect from the process.
Free or Low-Cost Legal Help
Legal costs can be a concern, but support is available if you are on a low income. You may be eligible for legal aid, which can help cover the cost of legal advice and representation for judicial review cases. The rules about who can get legal aid are set out in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. Eligibility depends on your financial situation and the merits of your case. It’s worth speaking to a legal adviser or contacting a law centre to see if you qualify.
Some charities and voluntary organisations also offer free or low-cost advice, particularly for cases involving human rights or discrimination.
Why Early Advice Matters
Seeking advice as soon as possible is crucial. Early legal advice can help you:
- Understand whether you have a strong case for judicial review.
- Meet important deadlines for starting your claim.
- Gather the necessary evidence and documents.
- Explore alternatives, such as making a complaint or using an ombudsman scheme, before going to court.
Delays can reduce your chances of success or even prevent you from bringing a claim, so don’t wait to get help.
Official Resources and Guidance
For authoritative information on the judicial review process and the wider legal system, you can visit the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry provides official guidance, policy updates, and resources on how the courts operate.
If you want more detailed practical advice about judicial review – such as who can apply, what remedies are available, and what to expect – you can read the Citizens Advice guide to Judicial Review.
Remember, taking early and informed action is the best way to protect your rights and improve your chances if you need to challenge a public body’s decision.
