Judicial Review

Specialist judicial review solicitors acting for individuals, companies and public bodies.

"Clients are ‘very impressed with the degree of care’ Kingsley Napley LLP has in handling judicial reviews, public inquiries, inquests and regulatory matters."

Legal 500 UK, 2017

Whether you are an individual, senior professional, corporation, business group, charity or pressure group, a judicial review can be a powerful way of insisting a public body changes its course or, at the very least, reviews and explains its actions.

Known for our notable strengths in judicial review litigation and our incisive and pragmatic advice, the team is involved in many leading cases, and listed in The Lawyers’ Top 20 Cases of 2015, for acting on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority, in a ground breaking challenge by Rosneft to sanctions imposed against Russia.

Making a judicial review claim

We understand that decisions made by government and public bodies have far reaching and serious commercial, financial, organisational or personal consequences, and that it is vital they are correctly made. When things go wrong, we can help you consider or make a judicial review claim to ensure such decisions are fair, lawful and rational, and do not infringe on EU treaty or human rights.

How our judicial review solicitors can help

As one of the few dedicated public law teams in the City, we know the ins and outs of bringing or defending a claim. We work with you from the beginning to quickly identify the core issues and gain an insight into your key concerns, allowing us to deliver clear, focussed and commercially driven advice and management of your case.

We can also help you if you are a regulator or public body, facing the scrutiny of judicial review. Our team’s experience of working for central government and statutory regulators means we also have a clear understanding of the wider context in which decisions are made, together with the broader impact of a claim on the organisation. 

The team is led by Adam Chapman, formerly head of one of the judicial review litigation teams at the Treasury Solicitor’s Department, and who continues to be consistently recognised as a leader in his field.

recent judicial review cases

  • Acting for the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association and the Criminal Law Solicitors Association in 2 separate challenges to the Lord Chancellor’s to introduce a “two tier” system of contracts for criminal legal aid defence solicitors
  • Acting for the Financial Conduct Authority in defending a challenge made by Rosneft arising out of the EU sanctions on the Russian Federation
  • Acting for a group of companies challenging third party notices issued by HMRC following a mutual legal assistance request
  • Acting for the General Dental Council in defending a challenge to an increase in annual registration fees for dentists
  • Acting for individuals in challenges to fitness to practise decisions impacting on their  professional reputation
  • Acting for senior police officers in challenges to the police misconduct scheme

 

Sources praise the group's abilities in 'sensitive, high-profile, politically inflected work' and attest that 'what is really refreshing is their commitment to their clients and the care they take'..."

Chambers UK, A Clients Guide to the UK Legal Profession

A real diversity of work. They benefit from experience acting for individuals, companies and public bodies, which gives them a depth and gravitas that sets them apart. Also, they are very friendly and down to earth individuals."

Chambers UK, A Clients Guide to the UK Legal Profession, 2017

 

 

Judicial Review Insights

View all

Blogs

Judicial Review and the Creep of Closed Material Procedures - R (on the application of Haralambous) v Crown Court at St Albans and another

The High Court’s decision is (sometimes) final: the Court of Appeal confirms the decision of a coroner in relation to witnesses and the risk of harm caused by giving evidence

Legal Update: Judicial review of decisions in the Crown Court

Legal update: Administrators’ efforts to realise Monarch’s assets boosted by judicial review victory

Legal Update: NGOs win challenge to Aarhus costs caps

TfL finds Uber no-longer ‘fit and proper’ to operate in London

The Coroner’s decision is (almost always) final: the Court’s approach to judicial review of inquest proceedings

The special constitutional importance of judicial review may demand a distinctive approach to the recovery of litigation costs, but will the latest recommendations be taken forward?

Brexit: what the Government (whoever forms it) needs to do now

To what extent is an appellate disciplinary tribunal entitled to interfere with a finding made by a panel of first instance when that finding is predicated on primarily hearsay evidence

What role should personal mitigation play in disciplinary proceedings where a police officer is found to have committed gross misconduct?

The availability of judicial review against bodies exercising “public functions”

Judicial review reform: False assumptions replaced by objective research

Fun and games, but not a sport - judicial review action determines bridge’s status

'Reform' of judicial review – The bandwagon trundles on

Judicial review and suitable alternative remedies

At last some hope: defeat in the House of Lords of Judicial Review Proposals

Judicial Review Reforms – a collision course with the judges?

Changes to Judicial Review of Planning Decisions come into force today

Challenging the Financial Conduct Authority – no anonymity and (almost) no judicial review

Judicial Review Reform – the juggernaut rumbles on

Judicial review reform - will it work?

Inconsistent, partial and falling below the standards to be expected of a responsible public body – but still lawful: TfL’s bus advertisement ban

Supreme Court approves CPS policy on discontinuing private prosecutions – but only just...

Missing the point – the Prime Minister and judicial review

Applications for search warrants and the duty of disclosure: does it matter if the police get it wrong?

Sanctions – ameliorating the effect on individuals

A Chief Coroner at long last... but what difference will he make?

London Metropolitan University: Any chance of challenging the UKBA?

Virgin Trains: procuring a fight

Judicial review – busting the explosion myth

Challenging the FSA Regulatory Decisions Committee: the Upper Tribunal or the Administrative Court?

Challenging a decision of the Financial Ombudsman Service: Dare you?

Public Law Update: Healthcare rationing

Close Load more

Let us take it from here.

+44 (0)20 7814 1200

enquiries@kingsleynapley.co.uk

Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility