The Independent Review of Administrative Law
The Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL) was a panel set up by the UK Government to review the judicial review process. As part of their review, the IRAL ran a Call for Evidence from 07 September to 26 October 2020. We submitted evidence, gathered from both decision-makers (staff working in health, care and social work) and people who access services (and the family members, advocates and community groups that support them) showed that across the board there was strong support for judicial review in its current form.
The panel looked at the things set out in its “terms of reference” including:
- Whether the reasons (or grounds) for bringing a judicial review should be codified. This means put into a written law. At the moment, the three grounds for judicial review, outlined above, are part of the common law. This means they have been set down in legal cases over a long period of time and become principles of our legal systems. A lot of rules and procedures for legal cases in the UK are part of common law.
- Whether the category of justiciable matters (the situations where a judicial review of a decision can take place) should be restricted. The means looking at changing what public authority decisions can be challenged by people.
- Whether the law of standing (who can bring a judicial review) should be altered. This means looking at changing which people can challenge decisions by public authorities.
BIHR’s Key Findings
We submitted our evidence in October 2020. Our submission showed judicial review is a crucial mechanism for protecting and respecting the human rights of people in the UK. Judicial review protects not only the people that are directly affected by a decision that is made by public bodies but everybody, by helping to create a human rights culture in the UK.
100%
of people, advocates and campaigners said they felt the judicial review process had a positive impact on decision-making.
80%
of staff working in public bodies said they felt the judicial review process had a positive impact on decision-making.
100%
of people, advocates and campaigners said they would be worried if the judicial review process was changed or diluted.
80%
of staff working in public bodies said they would be worried if the judicial review process was changed or diluted.
Related information
How to bring a legal case
Read our plain-language guide to bringing a legal case including by judicial review. Please be aware BIHR cannot support on individual cases.
How to bring a legal case
Read our plain-language guide to bringing a legal case including by judicial review. Please be aware BIHR cannot support on individual cases.
Stay up-to-date
Get our newsletter
Get monthly updates on UK human rights law and our work, resources and events sent straight to your inbox.