Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Judicial Review and Courts Bill

Tuesday 9 November 2021 · 5 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 2 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The Bill had its Second Reading on 26 October and is now in Committee.
  • The Bill introduces new remedies to strengthen judicial review, including suspending quashing orders.
  • The Government is drafting measures to remove means test on exceptional case funding for bereaved families.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Angela Crawley SNP
Justice & Courts Parliamentary Procedure
Context

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill has been discussed in the House of Commons. The bill aims to fix inefficient processes causing delays in the justice system.

Question

What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the Judicial Review and Courts Bill?

Answer from James Cartlidge

The Bill had its Second Reading in this House on 26 October. It is now in Committee, where the hon. Lady is part of that Committee. The Bill fixes inefficient processes causing delay and gives judges more flexibility to resolve judicial reviews practically.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Angela Crawley SNP
Democracy & Elections
Context

The minister recently made comments about UK Parliament potentially correcting decisions of the judiciary that ministers disagree with, raising concerns for judicial independence.

Question

Given recent chilling comments from the Minister on the UK Parliament's role in correcting judicial decisions Ministers disagree with, can he acknowledge the concerns this raises regarding separation of powers and how it affects the UK's credibility among European countries who threaten judicial independence?

Answer from James Cartlidge

The Bill strengthens judicial review by introducing new remedies like suspending quashing orders, which the hon. Lady mentioned as beneficial for constituents and public administration.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Concerns about the separation of powers were not directly addressed, only countered with benefits.

How: Counterargument

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Andrew Slaughter Lab Hammersmith and Chiswick
Justice & Courts
Context

The Bill includes a chapter on coroners but does not address the issue of legal aid for bereaved families when state institutions are represented.

Question

Given that the Bill contains a whole chapter on coroners yet entirely neglects giving bereaved families fair hearing at inquests, especially regarding their right to legal aid without means testing when many state bodies are represented free-of-cost, can he now commit to non-means-tested funding for such families and table amendments accordingly?

Answer from James Cartlidge

We are drafting measures to remove means test on exceptional case funding, which should be implemented early next year.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q4 Anne McLaughlin SNP
Justice & Courts Standards & Ethics
Context

There is concern about the removal of Cart and Eba-type judicial reviews, which are vital for ordinary people.

Question

Why does the Government propose to remove a crucial last line of defence for ordinary citizens by eliminating Cart and Eba-type judicial reviews used predominantly by vulnerable individuals?

Answer from James Cartlidge

We have debated this extensively in Committee. The Bill is fair as cases receive three bites at the cherry, whereas others get only two. However, we must manage resources efficiently; dealing with serious backlogs takes priority.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific concerns about fairness were not fully addressed, focusing on resource management instead.

How: Resource Prioritization

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q5 Anne McLaughlin SNP
Justice & Courts Standards & Ethics
Context

There is worry that the presumption in favour of prospective quashing orders will prevent ordinary people from obtaining redress or compensation, even if courts declare actions unlawful.

Question

How does this Government's proposed presumption clause allowing for prospective quashing orders, ensuring no redress or compensation and time to change laws, align with natural justice principles for the average person compared to those with wealth and power?

Answer from James Cartlidge

The presumption clause is there simply to expedite jurisprudence accumulation, not as hon. Lady suggested for weakening natural justice for ordinary citizens.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Concerns about natural justice were addressed but with a counter argument rather than a direct answer.

How: Counterargument

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email