Justice secretary Chris Grayling makes concessions to avoid a third successive defeat, over changes to judicial review procedure, in the House of Lords
The government is proposing three amendments to the the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, two of which concern judicial review. This is to avoid a third defeat, by the Lords over the Governments proposed changes to the judicial review process.
In October 2014 the Government lost three parliamentary votes, in the Lords, over clauses which sought to limit the ability of individuals and organisations to challenge public decisions in the courts via judicial review. On 1 December 2014 the House of Commons voted to remove the Lords amendments, substituting a concession offered by justice secretary Chris Grayling. This concession concerned interveners.
“An "intervener" is any person granted permission (a) to file evidence or (b) to make representations at the hearing of the judicial review. Generally the court will grant permission if the interveners, through their expertise, are likely to be able to assist the court in understanding either the legal issues in question or the factual basis of the claim. In recent years there has been a striking increase in interventions in judicial review. Interveners have included campaign groups, government departments and companies indirectly affected by the outcome of the review.”
The concessions were that:
- Interveners would be liable for costs if their evidence and representations have not been ‘of significant assistance’ to the court.
- Interveners would also be liable for costs if they have behaved ‘unreasonably’ and if a significant part of their evidence is on matters that are not necessary for the court to consider.
On 9 December 2014 the rejected amendments were ‘ping-ponged’ back to the Lords for a further debate, in which the Government was defeated on two votes. During the debate the Lords also heard that Chris Grayling had misled Parliament during the earlier Commons debate.
Government concessions
The two amendments would allow judges to make the final decision on whether to grant permission for a judicial review challenge, and allow judicial committees to decide at what financial level individuals who fund cases will have to be identified.
Commons MPs were voting on the delayed legislation for a third time today, with the Lords due to consider the Bill next week.
For more information see http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/jan/13/plans-restrict-judicial-review-concessions-lords-chris-grayling