1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Judicial Review 2020

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

  • Tue 23rd June 2020 until Wed 29th July 2020
  • On-demand
  • 5 hrs CPD

£204 + VAT

Book Now

  • Highly recommended

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

  • Watch on-demand

    All talks are pre-recorded, to the standard of a TV broadcast service, so you can watch on-demand, whenever suits you

  • Chatham House Rule

    So you get the best, most readily usable information our experts wouldn't share elsewhere

So you know what to expect, here is a clip from the on-demand recordings for Judicial Review

On-demand Programme

  1. Chair's Introduction

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

    Chaired by: John McKendrick QC

    John is "a brilliant and persuasive advocate - coming up with creative ways to overcome the most difficult issues in his cases.” He served as the Attorney General of Anguilla for two years.

  2. Conspicuous unfairness

    How are judges weighing "conspicuous unfairness" as a factor since Gallaher?

    Important new innovation or damp squib?

    Answered by: James Maurici QC

    James is "one of the top JR silks at the Bar - bringing a really clear insight into how cases are won and lost." He is defending five JRs over the proposed new runway at Heathrow Airport.

  3. Duty to consult

    How far can you push the boundaries of a public body's duty to consult (adequately), supported by case law and practical examples?

    Answered by: Sarah Hannett

    Sarah is "a pre-eminent JR lawyer, known for her ability to find solutions." She is instructed in the Third Direction case, the lawfulness of the participation of MI5 agents in criminal activity.

  4. Duty of Candour

    Drawing on recent and live cases, when is the duty of candour triggered?

    How extensive is it?

    How is it interacting with Data Protection laws?

    Answered by: Tim Buley QC

    Tim acted in the JR over whether the benefit cap discriminates against women, single parents and their children. "Simply put: he is a brilliant advocate. As good as it gets."

  5. Proportionality

    What - right now - counts and makes a difference when arguing ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’ and proportionality in JR challenges?

    Answered by: James Goudie QC

    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.

  6. Reasons and fairness

    Is there a shift in the wind over the general common law duty to give full and comprehensible reasons linked to fairness?

    Answered by: Fenella Morris QC

    Fenella is "an intellectual powerhouse - encapsulating incredibly complex issues in beautifully put arguments." She acted in the JR over the extension of Wasps Rugby Club's stadium lease.

  7. Disclosure

    What is realistic and achievable when seeking disclosure in cases concerning public interest immunity and closed material proceedings?

    Answered by: Hugo Keith QC

    Hugo acted for the Home Secretary in the JR over the “Jihadi Beatle” and the Electoral Commission over Leave.EU. "He is a phenomenal lawyer and a pleasure to work with."

  8. Facts are facts

    Facts are facts, but not all facts are created equal - when is a fact "jurisdictional" and why does it matter?

    Answered by: James McClelland

    James is acting for Uber in its challenge to TfL’s refusal to renew its operating licence within London. "He inspires real confidence", and is named as the UK public law lawyer of the year.

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

Book Now

Top