Landmark Chambers Annual Judicial Review Moot Competition 2026 Grand Final

Judicial review is the mechanism by which courts assess the legality of decisions made by public bodies, ensuring they act within their statutory powers, follow fair procedures, and respect fundamental rights. In England and Wales, the modern doctrine crystallised through landmark cases such as Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission (1969), which expanded the concept of jurisdictional error, and the GCHQ case (1985), which categorised the grounds of review as illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety. The Human Rights Act 1998 added proportionality as a key ground where Convention rights are engaged, while devolution and EU membership (until 2020) further reshaped the constitutional landscape in which review operates. In recent years, judicial review has become politically contested. The Miller I (2017) and Miller II (2019) Supreme Court decisions on Brexit and prorogation sharpened debate over the courts' role in policing executive power. The Independent Review of Administrative Law (Faulks Review, 2021) and the subsequent Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 introduced suspended and prospective-only quashing orders and curtailed Cart judicial reviews. Continuing reform proposals, including measures in successive Bills of Rights debates, test the boundary between parliamentary sovereignty, executive prerogative, and judicial supervision. Today the central questions concern standing, ouster clauses, the intensity of review (particularly in national security, immigration, and resource-allocation contexts), and the appropriate remedy where unlawfulness is found. Comparative jurisprudence from common law jurisdictions increasingly informs domestic debate as courts navigate these constitutional pressures.

Planning law in the United Kingdom is rooted in the Town and Country Planning Act 1947, which nationalised the right to develop land and established the modern system of local plans and planning permissions. Successive consolidations, most notably the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, have layered on plan-led decision-making, environmental impact assessment, and heritage controls. The National Planning Policy Framework, first issued in 2012 and revised most recently in 2023-2024, sets out the presumption in favour of sustainable development that anchors decision-making by local planning authorities and the Planning Inspectorate. The field has been shaped by a steady stream of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal authority on plan interpretation (Tesco Stores v Dundee, Hopkins Homes), material considerations, and the relationship between planning and other regulatory regimes. Recent litigation has focused on nutrient neutrality, biodiversity net gain (introduced under the Environment Act 2021), the lawfulness of development consent orders for nationally significant infrastructure projects, and the assessment of downstream greenhouse gas emissions (Finch v Surrey County Council, 2024). Current debate centres on the Government's ambition to accelerate housing delivery and infrastructure consenting through the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 and proposed planning reforms, against persistent constraints from environmental designations, judicial review challenges, and local opposition. Delegates must weigh the tension between economic growth, housing need, climate obligations, and procedural fairness in plan-making and individual consenting decisions.

Environmental law has evolved from a patchwork of pollution-control statutes into an integrated regime spanning climate, biodiversity, water, air quality, and chemicals regulation. In the UK, the Climate Change Act 2008 established legally binding carbon budgets and the net zero target (strengthened to net zero by 2050 in 2019), while the Environment Act 2021 created the Office for Environmental Protection and introduced statutory environmental targets and biodiversity net gain. EU-derived obligations under the Habitats, Birds, Water Framework, and EIA Directives remain retained law, though the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 has begun reshaping their status. Climate litigation has accelerated. In Friends of the Earth v Secretary of State (2022 and 2024), the High Court twice held the Government's Net Zero Strategy unlawful for inadequate quantification of policy delivery. Finch v Surrey County Council (2024) required downstream Scope 3 emissions to be assessed in EIA for fossil fuel projects. Strategic litigation in Strasbourg (KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland, 2024) and before the ICJ and ITLOS is establishing that climate inaction may breach human rights and law of the sea obligations. Domestic enforcement against water companies for sewage discharges has also generated significant public law challenges. The central tensions concern the justiciability of climate targets, the standard of review applied to scientific and policy judgments, the post-Brexit divergence from EU environmental standards, and the adequacy of regulator action. Delegates will examine how courts balance executive discretion against statutory environmental duties and increasingly explicit international obligations.

Public law in the United Kingdom governs the relationship between the state and the individual, encompassing constitutional law, administrative law, and human rights. Its foundations lie in parliamentary sovereignty as articulated by Dicey, tempered by the rule of law and, since 1998, by the Human Rights Act's incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Devolution settlements for Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, together with the now-departed framework of EU law, have produced a layered constitutional order that the courts have repeatedly been called upon to interpret. The past decade has seen sustained constitutional contestation. Miller I (2017) confirmed that triggering Article 50 required statutory authority; Miller II (2019) held the prorogation of Parliament unlawful; the AAA (Rwanda) (2023) decision led to the Safety of Rwanda Act 2024, which sought to legislate around a Supreme Court finding of fact. Successive governments have proposed Bills of Rights, reform of the Human Rights Act, and restrictions on judicial review. The Illegal Migration Act 2023, Public Order Act 2023, and ongoing debate over the European Convention have placed rights protection at the centre of political contention. Key current questions concern the limits of legislative override of judicial findings, the use and interpretation of ouster clauses, the constitutional status of devolved competence (as in the Scottish Continuity Bill and Gender Recognition Reform references), and the United Kingdom's continued adherence to international human rights commitments. Delegates will engage with how the courts maintain legality and rights protection within a sovereign parliamentary system under political strain.