Category: Judicial review
-
![Crash Krylova: Trans People in Prison: For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59](https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/crash_wigley.jpg)
Crash Krylova: Trans People in Prison: For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59
Introduction On 19 June 2026, the Outer House of the Court of Session handed down judgment in the case of For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59 (“For Women Scotland 3”). This piece is intended as a critique of that judgment, exploring the relevance of the Equality Act 2010 and the Schedule 22(1)…
-
Bhavya Johari – The Political Constitution’s Broken Promise: Arms, Sanctions and Accountability after Al-Haq
In September 2024, the Government suspended around thirty arms export licences to Israel, having found a clear risk that United Kingdom equipment might be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law. It exempted one category, creating a carve-out for components made in the United Kingdom for the F-35 combat aircraft, which continued to…
-
Alistair Mills: The Interpretation of Policy and the Proscription of Palestine Action
As is well known, the group “Palestine Action” has been subject to proscription by the Home Secretary under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Court of Appeal has recently handed down judgment in litigation challenging the designation: Secretary of State for the Home Department v R (Huda Ammori) [2026] EWCA Civ 721. The Divisional Court had…
-
Adrian Kreutz: Dualism, Constitutional Conservatism, and Politically Sensitive Judicial Review
1. Introduction Recent public law cases concerning dualism––the operative divide between international and domestic jurisprudence––have prompted renewed debate about the constitutional role of judicial review in the United Kingdom. At first glance, decisions such as R (FDA) v Minister for Cabinet Office [2024] EWHC 1729 (Admin); and R (Al Haq) v Secretary of State for…
-
Jonathan Collinson: A New Independent Appeals Body for Immigration and Asylum: Accountability, Transparency, and Oversight
This post examines questions of accountability, transparency and oversight in the context of the UK government’s proposal for a new Independent Appeals Body for immigration and asylum decisions, replacing the existing First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (hereafter, FtT). It is prompted by the government’s official consultation which, amongst other things, asked: What mechanisms should…
-
Adam Tomkins: On ABJ: Proscribed Organisations, Proportionality, and Freedom of Speech
In R v ABJ [2026] UKSC 8 a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that the offence of expressing support for a proscribed organisation, as defined in the Terrorism Act 2000, is not a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court’s verdict was no surprise: the…
-
Sam Guy: Are judicial reviews in the Planning Court taking too long?
The current government has placed much emphasis on the perceived delays and chilling effects to the delivery of major infrastructure projects as a result of judicial review challenges by project opponents (framed as so-called ‘NIMBYs’ or ‘blockers’), and has introduced some reforms targeted at minimising the impacts of these challenges following an independent review commissioned by the…
-
Daniella Lock: In Defence of the Divisional Court’s Palestine Action Ruling
This post responds to important issues raised by Dane Luo and Gabriel Tan with regard to one of the grounds upheld by the Divisional Court in the judicial review of Palestine Action’s proscription (R (Ammori) v Home Secretary [2026] EWHC 292 (Admin)). The ground was upheld on the basis that the Home Secretary’s proscription decision considered…
-
![Weronika Galka: Secret proceedings, (mal)administration, and the courts: RA and AA v SSFCDA, MZZ v SSD and SSHD and In the Matter of the SSD [2026] EWCA Civ 3](https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/galka-photo.jpg)
Weronika Galka: Secret proceedings, (mal)administration, and the courts: RA and AA v SSFCDA, MZZ v SSD and SSHD and In the Matter of the SSD [2026] EWCA Civ 3
In early January 2026, the Court of Appeal (Peter Jackson LJ, Elisabeth Laing LJ, and Jeremy Baker LJ) handed down the decision in R (RR and AA) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Affairs [2026] EWCA Civ 3 (“RR and AA”). Brought by the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Affairs (“SSFCDA”), the Secretary…
-
Conor McCormick: The Attorney General and Residual Legal Accountability
Access to justice in public law contexts is mediated by several procedural rules, including standing and permission requirements, which reflect a concern to confine judicial review to cases that properly warrant the governmental costs of public law litigation. However, in addition to these universal checkpoints, which are a well-known feature of the judicial review terrain,…