7 October 2022
How to get your voice heard in the Covid-19 inquiry
The first preliminary hearing for module 1 of the Covid-19 Inquiry on 4th October is a powerful reminder that it is more vital than ever that those who may be called to participate (or who have valuable perspectives to contribute) are prepared for what lies ahead.
26 July 2022
Case Note – Judicial Review of Covid-19 care home policy: Gardner & Harris v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care & Ors [2022] EWHC 967 (Admin)
After over two long years of life under the shadow of the Covid-19 pandemic, we can circle back and
reflect on our colleague, Sophie Kemp’s predictions in relation to ‘the future public inquiry into
Covid-19’ in the light of the High Court judgment Gardner & Harris v Secretary of State for Health
and Social Care & Ors [2022] EWHC 967 (Admin).
21 July 2022
Case note – CPR Part 18 Requests for Further Information in judicial review proceedings: R (KBL) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and ors [2022] EWHC 1545 (Admin) and R (JZ) V Secretary of State for the Home Department and ors [2022] EWHC 1708
CPR Part 18 gives power to the court to order a party to proceedings to provide further
information, where this is necessary to resolve disputes. Applications for orders under
CPR18 are very rare in judicial review cases but two recent decisions of the Administrative
Court illustrate the kind of circumstances in which orders will be made; and also, strikingly,
that an order can be made at the conclusion of a substantive hearing.
12 July 2022
Technology & the criminal justice system
Fred Allen explains why taking a critical approach to emerging technologies is vital.
26 May 2022
Case Note - amenability to judicial review challenge: R (Taggart) v The Royal College of Surgeons [2022] EWHC 1141 (Admin)
The Administrative Court of England and Wales has recently considered whether the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS), when producing a report, under the ‘Invited Review Mechanism’ (IRM), could be challenged by way of judicial review. The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill provides a helpful review of the relevant authorities and illustrates the limits of the judicial review jurisdiction – she concluded that a challenge could not be made.