The following Public Law practice note Produced in partnership with Morayo Fagborun Bennett of Hardwicke Chambers provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
Disclosure (stating that a document exists or has existed) in judicial review proceedings is expected to be achieved through compliance with the duty of candour rather than a formal disclosure process.
Disclosure is not required unless the court orders otherwise. This default position is because judicial review is usually concerned with the legal consequences of (largely) agreed facts and the court is not trying to resolve factual disputes. This applies in judicial review, statutory reviews and appeals in the Administrative Court.
The court has a broad discretion to order disclosure. However, that discretion will be exercised sparingly.
All parties to judicial review proceedings are under a general duty of candour requiring them to disclose facts and information needed and ensure they are put before the court for the fair determination of the issues:
expert witnesses in personal injury cases to have access to documents on drug manufacture for the purposes of the case, for other purposes the witness (a journalist) was under a duty of confidentiality not to disclose
the timing of disclosure of evidence has a bearing on costs and assessment of payments in
Adherence to the duty of candour should result in sufficient disclosure.
The duty of candour for a defendant in judicial review proceedings is to be open and frank throughout them.
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers the question of when court proceedings can be stayed. It identifies scenarios in which a party may apply for a stay of proceedings, including to allow for: a jurisdictional challenge; arbitration; an attempt to settle; related criminal proceedings; an opportunity to
Elements of the offence of perverting the course of justicePerverting the course of justice is a common law offence which can only be tried on indictment in the Crown Court. The elements of the offence are:•a person acts or embarks on a course of conduct•which has a tendency to•and is intended to
Tipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities so that they could take steps to cover up their misdeeds or disappear.
This Practice Note considers claims for damages for breach of statutory duty. For guidance on claims for damages for a negligent breach of duty of care outside a statutory duty, see Practice Notes:•Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?•Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?Breach of
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.