Judicial Review (JR) In High Court After Grant Of Permission

If permission is granted, either initially on the papers, or at an oral hearing, the Defendant is then required to respond fully and formally. Up to this point he will probably have relied upon “Summary grounds of opposition”. The Defendant must now set out the decision-maker’s position in full, providing evidence in the form of witness statements explaining the history of the case, the procedure followed, the reasoning process and so on.

Once a case is granted permission to proceed it will go on to a substantive hearing, unless settled or withdrawn, although occasionally there may be a pre-hearing known as a case management conference, or an interim relief hearing to take a view on an urgent element of the judicial review. Once permission is granted, the defendant must submit detailed grounds of defense within a specified time frame (35 days from the date of permission grant). Nearer the hearing date counsel for both sides will submit written arguments as to why the claim should either be allowed (on behalf of the claimant) or dismissed (on behalf of the Home Office). These are called skeleton arguments.

The case will then have a substantive court hearing at which oral arguments are made by both the claimant and defendant. The court will then deliver a final judgment, which will either allow the claim and provide a form of relief in a court order, or dismiss the claim upholding the Home Office’s position.

Procedure At The Hearing

Procedure at the substantive hearing is very simple:

• The Case will normally be heard by a single Judge from the Administrative Court Panel, that is Judges appointed to a panel because of their experience, and he will have read the papers beforehand
• Counsel appearing for the Claimant introduces the case, refers to the witness statements and addresses the Court about the law. Counsel will often refer to cases previously decided by the Courts which concern similar points of law (called “precedents” or “authorities”).
• The GLD’s Counsel will then present the case in answer to the Claimant.
• Finally the Claimant’s Counsel will have the last word and will address the Court again on any points arising from the Defendant’s case.
• The Court then considers the rival arguments and delivers a decision, either immediately or after taking time for consideration (a judgment delivered later is called a “reserved judgment”).

All parties are required to prepare in advance an outline (“skeleton”) argument for the use of the Court at the substantive hearing. This is part of a tendency to encourage parties to reduce their case as much as possible to writing, though the Court will still be anxious to let everybody have their say. So far as witnesses are concerned, remember that the aim of Judicial Review is to examine the legality of a decision, and to ensure that proper procedure is followed: the Court is not well equipped to carry out a fact-finding exercise and will not normally embark upon one. For that reason it is rare for the witnesses who have made statements to be called to give oral evidence or to be cross-examined on their statements. There is power in the Court to order it, but it is rarely exercised. That is another reason why the duty of candour has to be observed.

Various Time Limits In Judicial Review In High Court

It may be helpful to set out in summary form the principal time limits set by the Rules.

• Claimant required to file his Claim Form “promptly and in any event not later than three months after the grounds to make the claim first arose”: CPR 54.5
• Claimant must serve Claim Form on the Defendant within seven days after date of issue: CPR 54.7
• Defendant must file Acknowledgement of Service not later than 21 days after service of the Claim Form: CPR 54.8
• If permission refused on the papers, the Claimant may within 7 days request reconsideration at oral hearing: CPR 54.12
• If permission granted, the Defendant must file and serve his written evidence within 35 days after service of the order giving permission: CPR 54.14

The Remedies Which The Court May Grant

The remedies which the Court may grant following a successful Judicial Review are:

• A quashing order, by which the Court sets aside or cancels a decision (or subordinate legislation) found unlawful;
• A prohibiting order, by which the Court forbids the public authority to perform an act found unlawful;
• A mandatory order, by which the Court instructs the public authority to perform a public duty;
• A declaration, by which the Court declares what the law is, for example that a decision is unlawful;
• An injunction, usually an Order not to do something, but it can be positive;
• Damages, by which (in limited circumstances) the Court can award financial compensation.
• A declaration whereby the court can declare, by virtue of Section 4 of the Human Rights Act, that a certain provision of primary legislation is incompatible with a convention right.

In practice by far the most common order given by the Court to a successful Claimant is the quashing order on its own, even if the Claimant has sought, say, a prohibiting order with it. Where the Court has quashed a decision and remitted the matter to the decision-maker to make a fresh decision in accordance with the judgment of the Court, it will be unnecessary for the Court to add a prohibiting order as well.

How Can We Help?

As specialist immigration JR solicitors, we can reprsent you in your substantive JR hearing after the grant of permission for JR. If instructed to represent you regarding your substantive Judicial Review hearing before the High Court, the immigration casework to be carried out by our immigration solicitors will include the following:

• Taking detailed instructions from you and advising you about the relevant immigration laws and procedures to be adopted by the High Court in your Judicial Review substantive hearing at the High Court;
• Discussing with you the grounds on which permission to proceed with the Judicial Review has been granted and advising you about the weaknesses and strengths of Judicial Review (JR) matter;
• Where applicable, liaising with the Government Legal Department (GLD) for the Judicial Review to be settled with consent of both parties;
• Preparing a detailed brief to counsel explaining in detail the case history and the key legal issues in the case;
• Instructing the Barrister for skeleton arguments to be prepared to be submitted prior to the substantive hearing;
• Preparing the Judicial Review bundles and serving the same on the High Court and the Government Legal Department (GLD);
• Serving the skeleton arguments prepared by the Barrister on the High Court and the Government Legal Department (GLD);
• Arranging a pre-hearing conference of the Applicant with the Barrister and assisting the Barrister in understanding the case against the Home Office and grounds for the same;
• Attending the High Court substantive Judicial Review (JR) hearing and assisting the Barrister in preparing for oral submissions before the High Court judge;
• Doing all the follow up work until decision is reached by the High Court on your Judicial Review claim.

How Much We Charge?

Unless your matter is very complicated, our fees for our professional services for substantive Judicial Review hearing in the High Court after the grant of permission are as given in the fee table below:

The agreed fixed fee will depend on the complexity of the Judicial Review and the volume of casework involved in the Judicial Review. In addition to our fixed fee, the applicant will also have to pay the court fee for Judicial Review and the Barrister’s fee for advocacy work before the High Court Judge.

No Win No Fee

We can also act for you on no win no fee basis in relation to your substantive Judicial Review hearing after the grant of permission by the High Court if we find that the chances of success in your Judicial Review claim are 100%. The fee to be charged on No Win No Fee basis will depend on the complexity of the case and chances of success in the case. If your substantive Judicial Review hearing is unsuccessful, you will not have to pay our fees for our professional services.

Other Related Servvices

• Judicial Review In The High Court
• Paper Application To High Court For Permission To Apply For Judicial Review (JR)
• Application To High Court For Reconsideration Of Permission At An Oral Hearing
• Challenging Home Office Refusal Decisions
• Challenging The Refusal / Revocation Of Sponsor Licence
• Challenging Refusal Of Visitor Visa UK
• Challenging Removal from the UK
• Pre Action Protocol (PAP)
• Immigration Judicial Review (JR)
• Judicial Review (JR) In The Upper Tribunal (UT)
• Cart Judicial Review (JR) Against The Upper Tribunal
• Administrative Review (AR)
• Immigration Appeals
• Reconsideration Of Naturalisation / Nationality Application