Practice note provides Law Society's view of good practice for practitioners bringing immigration judicial review claims
The Law Society last week published a comprehensive new practice note on immigration judicial review.
You can read it in full on the Law Society's website here.
The practice note is intended for all practitioners bringing immigration judicial review claims on behalf of claimants before the Administrative Court in England and Wales (High Court) and the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (Upper Tribunal).
The note was developed by the Law Society's Immigration Law Committee, and was reviewed by the Honourable Mr Justice McCloskey, President of the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber, and by Alison Stanley of Bindmans.
It covers the judicial review process in detail, from when is judicial review an appropriate consideration and on what grounds, through to lodging a claim, appeals to the Court of Appeal, urgent applications and issues of costs and funding.
It includes a number of references to relevant case law and legislation throughout the text.
The Law Society says that there have been significant changes in practice and procedures affecting the conduct of claims for judicial review of immigration decisions. In addition, a number of recent judgments of the Upper Tribunal have emphasised the importance of compliance with the amended Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal Rules) Rules 2008 and the case management obligations upon representatives conducting judicial review claims.
R (on the application of Bilal Mahmood) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (continuing duty to reassess) IJR [2014] UKUT 00439 (IAC) and R (on the application of SN) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (striking out – principles) IJR [2015] UKUT 00227 (IAC) are highlighted in the practice note as key Upper Tribunal judicial review guidance cases.
Section 15 of the practice note provides a useful summary of good practice, noting: "The High Court and Upper Tribunal have specifically highlighted examples of bad practice and poor case management in immigration matters. Immigration is an area of law that places considerable pressure on the court system. Solicitors have an overriding duty to uphold the rule of law and to facilitate the proper administration of justice, even where that might conflict with their client's interests."
It further notes that when dealing with judicial reviews of decisions of the Upper Tribunal, practitioners should have regard to Akram & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v SSHD [2015] EWHC 1359 (Admin) in which the president of the Queen's Bench Division said: "There is a pressing need for legal representatives acting for claimants in judicial review proceedings to do so in a professional manner both towards their clients but also towards the court, bearing in mind that the paramount duty of all legal representatives acting in proceedings before courts is to the court itself. The need for this warning to be taken seriously increases as the resources available to the courts to act efficiently and fairly decreases. If the time of the court and its resources are absorbed dealing with utterly hopeless and/or unprofessionally prepared cases, then other cases, that are properly advanced and properly prepared, risk not having devoted to them the resources that they deserve."
Law Society practice notes provide the Society's view of good practice and are not intended as legal advice.