- Coronavirus(COVID-19)—permission refused for judicial review of lockdown restrictions (Dolan and others v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Local Government analysis: The coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis resulted in sweeping and dramatic restrictions being imposed on the daily life of the entire population. The High Court had to decide whether it was sufficiently arguable that the restrictions were unlawful so that permission for a full judicial review challenge to the legislation concerned should be given. Save for one issue on which a decision was adjourned for further argument, the court refused permission. The court decided that pre-existing public health legislation is sufficiently wide in its application to allow restrictions to be imposed across the entire population. The court decided that the government had not fettered its discretion by requiring five key tests to be met before the restrictions can be eased. The court decided that the restrictions do not breach human rights because they are a proportionate response to the scale of the emergency. Written by Alexander Campbell, barrister, at Field Court Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial