Judicial Review: An introduction
27th January, 2026
What is a judicial review?
Judicial review (JR) is a means to challenge the acts, omissions/failure to act and decisions of a public body through the Courts, because it is considered to have not acted lawfully.
JRs are assessed by a judge who will review the decision and evidence from the parties and determine whether the public body acted in accordance with the relevant laws associated with that decision. This can be due to key information not having been considered, complaints or decision-making procedures not having been followed correctly or laws not having been followed or interpreted correctly.
JRs are fact specific. The focus is on the procedures, information and laws that have (or have not) been considered when making the decision and not on whether the Judge or others would have reached the same outcome had they been the decision maker.
Possible orders from the Court if a JR is successful include:
- A quashing order overruling or undoing the decision (the most common);
- A prohibiting order, stopping the public body from taking an unlawful action it has not yet taken;
- A mandatory order instructing the public body to take a specific action;
- An injunction which is a temporary order requiring something to be done or not done until a final decision has been determined.
It is always worth keeping in mind that there is a risk that a judicial review challenge could be successful in quashing a decision but the same outcome could still be reached if and when redetermined by the public body.
Who is involved in a judicial review?
There are three main groups that could be included in Judicial Review proceedings.
The Claimant
A person or organisation wishing to challenge the decision made by a public body is known as the “Claimant”. These will be the person, group of persons or a company who the decision was made about or who is directly impacted by the decision. Examples of this could include:
- A property developer which has been refused planning permission;
- A company or commercial organisation impacted by a regulation or other decision of a public body;
- An individual who has been impacted by a decision to close services or a change a package of care;
- A community group wishing to challenge a decision which would impact the community they live in.
The Defendant
The public body in which the challenge is being made against is known as the “Defendant”. This may be:
- a local authority;
- a healthcare organisation such as an NHS Trust;
- a government body such as the Home Office or Environment Agency; or
- other organisations who act/take decisions on behalf of a public body.
The focus is on whether the organisation or person is “exercising their public functions” when making the decision that is being challenged.
Interested Parties
Sometimes, there are other parties who are not subject to a judicial review but would be directly impacted by the outcome of any decision made. A good example of this is where a community action is brought against a decision, such as a planning development in a local area. The Claimant for such an action would be the community group, the Defendant would be the local authority who granted the planning permission but the Developer who had been granted the planning permission would be impacted by the outcome of any challenge. In this instance, the developer can seek to join the proceedings as an “Interested Party” so that they have an opportunity to have their say and give evidence during proceedings which would then be considered by the Judge. Interested Parties would apply to the Court to be added in proceedings, and it would be for the Court to either accept or decline their request to be involved.
It is crucial that a party wanting to be involved in a JR has sufficient standing and therefore some sort of connection to the decision is required.
Timescales and seeking advice
Judicial reviews are typically brought in the Administrative Court or the Upper Tribunal and have a specific set of procedures and timescales that need to be followed.
A judicial review is expected to be brought “promptly” and, in some cases, within three months of the decision having been made. However, the timescales can be much shorter for certain challenges and so it is worth seeking legal advice as soon as you are aware of a decision that you think could be subject to a challenge. The Courts can be very strict when considering the reasons for not having brought a challenge sooner with reasons such as ignorance of the law or delays in seeking legal advice not being viewed upon favourably to grant additional time.
It is therefore very important that those wishing to make a challenge by judicial review, or who receive notice of such a challenge, acts quickly in seeking specialist legal advice.
How we can help
Ward Hadaway has a breadth of experience in dealing with a wide range of judicial review challenges whether from the perspective of the Claimant, Defendant, or an Interested Party.
Should you wish to challenge a public body decision, need to defend such a challenge or are aware of a challenge being made in which you consider yourself an interested party, contact Robert Glassford, Partner in the Commercial Litigation team to see if we can help.
More information on the Judicial Review offering at Ward Hadaway, including key contacts, can be found here.
Please note that this briefing is designed to be informative, not advisory and represents our understanding of English law and practice as at the date indicated. We would always recommend that you should seek specific guidance on any particular legal issue.
This page may contain links that direct you to third party websites. We have no control over and are not responsible for the content, use by you or availability of those third party websites, for any products or services you buy through those sites or for the treatment of any personal information you provide to the third party.
