Judicial Review: Shaping New Law into Solution-Focused Answers for Your Clients

  • Wednesday, 1st May 2019
  • The Caledonian Club 9 Halkin Street London SW1X 7DR
  • 5 hrs CPD

This conference has ended

Find a similar conference

  • Highly recommended

    Out of 15,684 evaluation forms, 96.54% said “Yes, I would recommend White Paper to a colleague

  • Flexible cancelation policy

    Cancel up to one week in advance to receive a full refund. Book your seats today to guarantee your space

  • Never recorded

    Never recorded and under the Chatham House Rule so you get the best step-by-step information

Answers to 15 Thorny Questions: Directly from 5 QCs, 2 Leading Juniors and 1 Venerated Solicitor

  1. Registration and coffee

  2. Chair's Introduction

    Judicial Review: Shaping new law into solution-focused answers for your clients

    Chaired by: Adam Chapman of Kingsley Napley

    Adam acted in Gentle (Iraq invasion), Binyam Mohammed (Guantanamo Bay), Purdy (assisted suicide), Al Skeini (deaths of Iraqi civilians), Wheeler (Treaty of Lisbon). "He knows just how to litigate against the government."

  3. Gallaher decision

    In the spotlight of Gallaher, how are you to steer clients through claims for "legitimate expectation" or "conspicuous unfairness"?

    What leeway do you have?

    Answered by: Gerry Facenna QC of Monckton Chambers

    Gerry is "a brilliant tactician; extremely persuasive; he cuts to the heart of the matter." He acted in the CJEU case on revocability of UK’s Article 50 Notice. He is shortlisted for "Public Law Silk of the Year."

  4. Deference

    What grey areas remain over deference in claims under the Human Rights Act 1998?

    What do recent cases show about the current approach of the Courts?

    Answered by: Sarah Hannett of Matrix Chambers

    Sarah is "a pre-eminent JR lawyer, known for her ability to find solutions to difficult issues." She acted in R v Ofsted over whether gender segregation in mixed-sex schools constitutes direct sex discrimination.

  5. Morning coffee

  6. EU Law

    How do you advise clients - practically and legally - on retained EU law after Brexit, i.e. convention rights, rights guaranteed by the EU Charter and the GDPR?

    Answered by: James Goudie QC of 11 KBW

    James is co-author of “Supperstone, Goudie and Walker on Judicial Review.” He is "the fount of all knowledge for JR" and "shows superb judgement in running a case." He sits as a Deputy High Court Judge.

  7. Pre-action in JR

    How do you guide clients through the twists and turns of the pre-action stage, including costs, ADR and candour?

    Answered by: David Wolfe QC of Matrix Chambers

    David is a go-to JR silk “who can understand the most complicated of problems and explain them with a clarity that no one else seems to have." He acted in the legal challenges to the first major planning permissions for fracking.

  8. Over-run

  9. Lunch

  10. No substantial difference

    When does the "no substantial difference test" make a difference in JR applications?

    Does the outcome differ, depending on whether the case is based on EU or UK law?

    Answered by: James Maurici QC of Landmark Chambers

    James is "one of the top JR silks at the Bar - bringing a really clear insight into how cases are won and lost." He acted in the JR challenging the decision to prefer the Heathrow airport expansion scheme.

  11. Remedies

    How do judges decide?

    When will they substitute their own decision and when will they refer it all back to the original decision maker?

    What are the predictors?

    Answered by: Richard Clayton QC of Ely Place Chambers

    Richard is "one of the finest minds at the Bar - an intellectual giant - with encyclopaedic knowledge." He appeared in the challenge not to add homeopathy to the list of treatments routinely prescribed in primary care.

  12. Disclosure

    How do you approach the practical and legal implications of variable standards of disclosure in the Administrative Court: i.e. feast or famine?

    Answered by: Jamie McClelland of Fountain Court Chambers

    Jamie is "a brilliant lawyer; his energy and intelligence are exceptional." He acted for MedCo defending multiple linked judicial review challenges to the operation of the MoJ's whiplash reporting accreditation scheme

  13. Over-run

  14. Close of conference

All speaker quotes are taken from Chambers Directory, Who’s Who Legal or Legal 500

This conference has ended

Find a similar conference