The Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review sets out a code of good practice and contains the steps which parties should normally follow before making a claim for judicial review. The Protocol encourages the parties to exchange information at an early stage and to consider using a form of alternative dispute resolution.
The Protocol applies to most judicial reviews. Judicial review is a procedure which allows people with a sufficient interest in an action or decision of a public body to ask a judge to review its lawfulness.
Claims for judicial review must normally be made within three months after the grounds to make the claim first arose. The court has the discretion to allow a late claim, but this is only used in exceptional circumstances. Compliance with the Protocol alone is unlikely to be a sufficient ground for making a late claim. For this reason where the claim may become time-barred the claimant is not expected to follow the Protocol.
The Protocol will not be appropriate where the defendant does not have the legal power to change the decision being challenged.
The Protocol will not be appropriate in urgent cases, for example, where a claimant is due to be removed from the UK or there is an urgent need for an interim order. In emergency cases the Protocol provides that it is good practice to fax the defendant the draft claim form which the claimant intends to issue or for a claimant to notify a defendant when an interim mandatory order is being sought.
The claimant is required, before making a claim, to send to the defendant a letter of claim. The purpose of the letter of claim is to identify the issues in dispute and establish whether court proceedings can be avoided.
Claimants are encouraged to use the suggested standard format letter of claim annexed to the Protocol. The Protocol specifies what information the letter of claim should contain.
The claimant should specify in the letter of claim when he expects the defendant to respond. Normally this should be within 14 days. Court proceedings should not normally be commenced before that date, unless the circumstances of the case require immediate action to be taken.
Defendants are encouraged to respond using the standard format letter of response annexed to the Protocol. Normally they should respond within 14 days of the letter of claim. If they fail to do so without good reason the court may take this into account when it decides the question of costs.
If a defendant is not able to respond within the proposed time limit, he should send an interim reply and propose a reasonable extension giving reasons why an extension is needed. Where required, additional information should be requested.
The claimant is not required to agree to an extension of time. However, if the court feels that any subsequent claim was made prematurely, the court may take this into account when it considers costs.
If the claim is conceded in full, the letter of response should make this clear. If the claim is conceded in part or not conceded at all, the letter of response should make this clear and should:
The letter of response should be sent to all interested parties identified by the claimant and should set out details of any other parties who the defendant considers also have an interest.
The Protocol expects the parties to consider alternative dispute resolution procedure as an alternative to judicial review. The courts take the view that judicial review should be a last resort and may require parties to provide evidence that alternative means of resolving their dispute were considered.
The Protocol sets out some of the options the parties may wish to consider for the purpose of resolving their dispute. These are discussion and negotiation, early neutral evaluation by an independent third party and a complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman or to the Local Government Ombudsman.
The Protocol, however, recognises that parties cannot and should not be forced to enter into any form of alternative dispute resolution procedure.
When determining costs the court will take into account the conduct of the parties including whether the parties have complied with the Protocol.
When considering whether a party has complied with the Protocol the court will be concerned about whether the parties have complied in substance and is unlikely to be concerned with minor or technical shortcomings. The court will also consider the proportionality of the steps taken compared to the size and importance of the matter, the urgency of the matter and the effect of non-compliance on the other party.
A single minor breach by one party will not exempt the other party from following the Protocol.
Nicola is a dual qualified journalist and non-practising solicitor. She is a legal journalist, editor and author with more than 20 years' experience writing about the law.
When you submit your details, you'll be in safe hands. Our partners are National Accident Helpline (a brand of National Accident Law, a firm of personal injury solicitors regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority). They are the UK's leading personal injury service. Their friendly legal services advisers will call you to talk about your claim and give you free, no-obligation advice. National Accident Law may pay us a marketing fee for our services.
By submitting your personal data, you agree for your details to be sent to National Accident Law so they can contact you to discuss your claim.
If you win your case, your solicitor's success fee will be taken from the compensation you are awarded - up to a maximum of 25%. Your solicitor will discuss any fees before starting your case.