Articles
Legal updates, insights and expert opinion on what matters to you.
English
A decision by a public body can affect your home, care, education, immigration position or access to support. If the body has acted unlawfully, failed to act or followed an unfair process, Judicial review may allow you to challenge what happened. The procedure applies in England and Wales and can involve strict deadlines, so speaking to a solicitor as soon as possible is important.
Judicial review asks a judge to examine the lawfulness or reasonableness of an enactment or a decision, action or failure connected with a public function. The court does not usually remake a decision because it would have reached a different conclusion. Depending on the case, the court may set the decision aside or require the public body to act or reconsider the matter.
Our Public Law and Human Rights solicitors can assess the decision, identify any suitable alternative remedy and advise you about urgency, costs and possible outcomes. Contact us for an initial assessment if a local authority, government department, the Home Office, police force, prison or another body exercising a public function has affected you.
Fill in the form below to get in touch with one of our dedicated team members, or call our team today on: 0800 260 5010
From understanding your rights to what happens during a claim, our Public Law & Human Rights Claims content hub brings together expert insight, practical guides and real client outcomes.
Judicial review cases often concern urgent decisions with serious effects on your daily life. Our Public Law and Human Rights team acts for people challenging decisions and failures involving community care, children’s rights, migrant rights, trafficking, detention and other public law issues. We will listen to what happened and explain your options in plain English.
The team is ranked for Administrative and Public Law in the Legal 500 UK 2027 and for Administrative and Public Law: Traditional Claimant in the Chambers UK Guide 2026. These independent rankings recognise the team’s exceptional work for people affected by decisions made by public authorities.
If we can help, we can review any papers, contact the public body, and prepare a letter before claim. Some disputes are resolved when the body withdraws its decision, agrees to reconsider it or takes the action requested. If court proceedings are needed, we can prepare the claim and consider whether to ask for urgent interim relief.
If you need to challenge a public body, contact our Public Law and Human Rights team as soon as possible. Call 0800 260 5010 or complete our online enquiry form. We will consider the decision, the deadline and any immediate steps needed before explaining whether we may be able to help.
We're helping people just like you all over the UK! Get in touch with our dedicated team today!
Judicial review is a procedure for asking the court to review the lawfulness of an enactment or a decision, action or failure to act involving a public function. If there is another suitable way to challenge the decision, such as am appeal or a review, this should usually be used first. The court must also give permission before the claim can proceed to a full hearing.
You may be able to challenge a decision, policy, delay or refusal by a public body if it affects you and there is an arguable public law error. The right route depends on the decision, the legal power being exercised, and any appeal, review, or complaints procedure available to you. Judicial review is generally a remedy of last resort, so an adequate alternative remedy should usually be used first.
We have advised clients on:
Human rights claims can also form part of a judicial review application as the Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights, subject to the Act’s exceptions.
Possible grounds for judicial review include acting outside legal powers, misunderstanding the law, following an unfair procedure, failing to consider relevant information or reaching an irrational decision. The available grounds depend on the legislation, policy, evidence and reasons connected with your case.
The first step is to collect the decision, reasons, policies, correspondence and evidence. Where time allows, you would normally send a letter before claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for judicial review. The letter identifies the legal issues, the action requested and any information or documents needed from the proposed defendant.
The protocol says a proposed defendant should normally respond within 14 days, although a shorter or longer period may suit the circumstances. An urgent case may need to be filed immediately. Sending a letter before claim does not suspend the disputed decision or extend the deadline for starting proceedings.
If the dispute remains unresolved, you can file a claim with the court and serve the relevant supporting documents on the defendant and any interested parties. If the court grants permission for judicial review, the claim can proceed to a substantive hearing unless the parties resolve it sooner.
The court may grant a quashing order, mandatory order, prohibiting order, declaration or injunction where the legal requirements are met. A quashing order can set aside a decision. A mandatory order can require action, while a prohibiting order can prevent unlawful action. Every remedy is discretionary and depends on the case.
Under the Senior Courts Act 1981, the court may remit a matter for reconsideration after making a quashing order. The public body may sometimes reach the same outcome after applying the law correctly. Compensation can be included only where there is a separate legal basis for it and the statutory conditions are satisfied.
Very quickly. You should seek advice as soon as you become aware of the decision or failure. Under Civil Procedure Rule 54.5, you must generally file a claim form promptly, and no later than three months after the grounds first arose. The court can refuse a delayed claim even within that period, so it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible.
Certain types of judicial review claims are subject to shorter time limits. For example, challenges to planning decisions must be filed within six weeks, and challenges to procurement decisions governed by the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 must be filed within 30 days.
Engaging in complaints procedures, appeals or negotiations does not pause the time limit for filing a judicial review claim. Compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol for judicial review, while encouraged, does not extend the time limits under CPR 54.5. The court may, however, consider compliance with the protocol when deciding whether to extend time in exceptional cases, provided you acted promptly upon becoming aware of the grounds for the claim.You should seek legal advice as soon as possible if you think a public body has acted unlawfully.
Judicial review claims must be brought promptly and, in any event, within three months of the decision, action or failure to act being challenged. The three-month period is a maximum time limit, not a target. A court may refuse permission to proceed if there has been unnecessary delay, even where the claim is issued within three months.
Some types of judicial review have shorter time limits. For example, certain planning challenges must be brought within six weeks, and certain procurement challenges may need to be brought within 30 days.
Making a complaint, pursuing an appeal, or entering into discussions with the public body will not usually stop time running. It is therefore important to obtain legal advice as soon as possible.
Legal aid may be available for judicial review in England and Wales. Eligibility depends on whether the matter falls within the legal aid scheme, the merits of the proposed case and your financial circumstances. Legal help may cover initial advice and preparatory work, while legal representation may cover eligible court proceedings.
We're rated‘Excellent’
Public authorities must act lawfully, fairly and in accordance with their legal duties. This guide explains when public bodies may be held accountable for unlawful decisions, human rights breaches or failures to fulfil their responsibilities. It also outlines the legal options that may be available, including judicial review and compensation claims, and why obtaining specialist legal advice promptly is important.
The Legal Aid Agency reversed its refusal of Exceptional Case Funding and Legal Help following a pre-action judicial review challenge brought by Simpson Millar's Public Law and Human Rights team. The case highlights how applicants outside the family categories prescribed by LASPO may still qualify for legal aid where Convention rights are engaged and demonstrates the importance of challenging funding decisions where an initial refusal may be based on an overly restrictive interpretation of the law.
The Home Office's proposed use of AI-assisted Facial Age Estimation (FAE) for asylum seekers has raised significant legal and safeguarding concerns. This article explores how the technology works, the legal framework governing age assessments, why children's organisations are concerned, and whether AI can be used consistently with existing protections. It also explains how disputed age assessments can be challenged and what the growing use of AI could mean for children's rights.
Fill in the form below to get in touch with one of our dedicated team members, or call our team today on: 0800 260 5010
